[Aleader-dev] Re: direction

[Joshua N Pritikin]

I am trying not to respond, but solving this simple misunderstanding
could ease reading the rest of the email.

On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:47:50PM -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > > > > I don't see haughty as being a sub-case of admires, unless admires
> > > > > includes self-admiration?
> > > >
> > > > To be precise, the appraisal category is:
> > > >
> > > >   "I am _expecting_ you to admire me."
> > > >   (I=Will, you=Chuckie, spoken in a pushy tone of voice)
> > >
> > > OCC states that admiration, by definition, involves one person to feel
> > > good about something that another has/does.  The emoter is focusing on
> > > the praiseworthiness of another's role in some situation.  The emoter
> > > finds that the admired person is upholding some kind of standard.  I find
> > > this to be a good coherent definition of the emotion (and the affective
> > > state) referred to by the word "admiration".
> >
> > Yes, that is exactly how Aleader defines the general category of
> > admiration.  However, Aleader leaves the point-of-view unspecified.
> > It sounds like OCC style admiration is always from the admirer's
> > point-of-view.  To contrast, Aleader considers the point-of-view
> > (the admirer or the admired) as a refinement of admiration.
> 
> Huh?  But the experience of the admirer or the admired are completely
> different!  So they are completely different emotions being experienced.
> No?

I am only trying to give you a clue about how Aleader's affective
states are organized.  I am not asserting that the admirer and admired
experience the same affective state -- obviously they don't.

> Hmm, on the outside chance...maybe this is a cultural difference in the
> way Americans vs Indians think about emotions (but I thought maybe you
> were American...whatever).

-- 
A new cognitive theory of emotion, http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/aleader