What if.......?

Question

Let's say that a virus spread throughout the world and damaged the areas of the brain that are responsible for emotions. The entire population was affected and could no longer experience any emotional reactions, although their reason and intellectual ability was unimpaired.

Would morality change if we no longer have any emotional reaction to cheaters, thiefs, inequity, or tragedy?

Maybe it's difficult to answer such a hypothetical question, but any opinions would be appreciated.

I'd appreciate real answers and not just people trying to get points. Thanks =) (yea Tori like that's gonna happen lol)

Thanks,
Tori

Sorry if this question on 'Yahoo Answers' is a bit too intimidating and has too many big words for some people to actually read and answer intelligently....sigh. Go back to your Lego's and play-doh, sorry to bother you......geez....lol

Answer 1

The only emotion one needs is love, all others stem from our own irrational nature.

Although if you do away with the rest you seize to be human.

Answer 2

Donno, I might find myself to be rather happy....errr....contented.

On the ideal side of things, if you based it squarely on people's emotional reactions and interactions, we may see a new age of enlightenment yet.

Emotions are usually considered the surface, theatrical reactions, and they are on the more primal level. But under the surface, there are also the motivational drives, ambition, proclivity toward learning and innovation, and they are, today, the most frowned upon in lieu of the more superficial, personified emotions.

Buddhism considers emotions to be attatchments to this world, and doesn't believe enlightenment is possible when one is enslaved to the power of emotions. It seems to neglect, however, that the base reason we find to keep living is based upon feelings, not raw logic, and all thoughts invoke some sort of emotion, no matter what they are. Without the primal emotions, balance can be achieved, but without any at all, life serves no purpose at all.

As far as the moral compass issue goes...

From my observation, we are living in an age of excess emotion, and the imbalances of 'morality' show much the same sociopathy as would be expected without emotions. Cheaters are praised and encouraged, iniquity is enabled, and tragedy is sensationalised, exploited for profit, and the victims are as ignored as they would be in a non-emotional culture. In fact, I think this world is much more cruel with such sadistic emotions than it would be by mere indifference.

Answer 3

There was an interesting case once where a miner was struck through the head with a metal rod. While he did not die, the part of his brain which sent emotional signals was detatched from a part which regulated that. While not exactly what you describe, in his case he had no control over his emotions what so ever and he therefore felt and acted whatever emotion happened to come with any situation and or tangent that he thought. The man was unable to function as a normal member of society as a result, if that gives you any help.

Answer 4

emotional response,, and morals aren't synomonous..

I would say that in a world where there is no emotional response.. we would then use logical thought and reasoning.... to address issues such as theft and cheating...

the problem would be dealing with those who have transgressed.. ie.. murder.. there would be no remorse.. and possibly no way to rehabilitate.......

I would see that laws would become more absolute,,,

emotions often get in the way of making informed decisions....

or implementing change for the better of the whole...

for example... let say there is a large dog.. who has consitently injured,, bitten,, or even has killed someone...

There are those who would save the dog .. as killing it would be a highly emotional matter....
and ... though the dog is unable to be rehabilitated.. it would be considered a menace to danger.. to all who would come in contact with it.. hence the animal.. would be euthinized.

now. change the dog.. in those statements to someone who was a serial killer.. ie.. the zodiac killer,, or the BTK serial killer...

and then .. when they were finished with their trial,,, there would be no emotional reaction to their disposition......

not able to be rehabilitated.. there would be those who would state ,,, death penalty... and those would would state.. no death penatly.. but the entire conversation would be done.. in a logical manner... lack of emotion...

we would become the Vulcans....

Answer 5

I do not believe that morality would change for we do not base moral systems on people's feelings or emotions. We base moral system, and hence law, on our understanding of good and right. I say "our understanding" so as not to admit moral relativism. There is an objective good and right, but our system of law does not always reflect this.

As said, morality is not based on emotions, but rather on what is just. We do not say that cheating is immoral because it hurts your teacher's feelings. No. We say that it is immoral because you are in a sense lieng on a test and using the answers of another. We do not say that theft is immoral because emotions, but rather because it is the wrongful taking of another's possesions.

In a sense, an emotionless world (while much less human) would be a much better moral world. We do not always act morally because we let our emotions cloud judgment. This is not to say that emotions are bad and should be supressed, but that emotions often bais our actions away from moral ones.

Answer 6

Well, mortality will be changed, for the creative side of the world will no longer exist. Paintings, dramas, poetry, literature, all will come to an end as there is no emotion left in the world to be expressed. Love will not exist, nor will sadness. We will be equivalent to the very mechanical things we use everyday. I could be compared to a coffemachine for god's sake! As we are machines hypothetically, we could possibly swallow up nature to make room for more of our 'hypothetical machines', in the end destroying earth as well as ourselves!

Answer 7

There's nothing that brings any human being from a rational deduction to an action but an animal emotion.

We would quickly die off from passivity by such a disease.

Answer 8

It would change everything, i guess. such a sad world.. living without any emotions at all. people wouldn't care even if somebody close to them died or if they are robbed or if there house was burnt. maybe death would be pointless too. somehow, everything would be.

Answer 9

Hmmm well I suppose people wouldn't see it as anything wrong but I think that if people don't feel anything at all anymore they wouldn't feel desperate because they are hungry or because whatever that causes people to go and steal so I don't think such things would ahppen anymore. Like they wouldn't feel fear to die, or feel the need to feed someone you know?

Answer 10

most of the world is already dreaming - many people already live in that world - the only path to freedom from such a world lies in your first two words, "What if..."