Published July 2018
| public
Journal Article
Author Reply: We Don't Yet Know What Emotions Are (But Need to Develop the Methods to Find Out)
- Creators
-
Adolphs, Ralph
- Andler, Daniel
Abstract
Our approach to emotion emphasized three key ingredients. (a) We do not yet have a mature science of emotion, or even a consensus view—in this respect we are more hesitant than Sander, Grandjean, and Scherer (henceforth "SGS") or Luiz Pessoa (henceforth "LP"). Relatedly, a science of emotion needs to be highly interdisciplinary, including ecology, psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy. (b) We recommend a functionalist view that brackets conscious experiences and that essentially treats emotions as latent variables inferred from a number of measures. (c) But our version of functionalism is not definitional or ontological. It is resolutely methodological, in good part because it is too early to attempt definitions.
Additional Information
© 2018 The Author(s). Article first published online: July 27, 2018; Issue published: July 1, 2018. We thank Andrea Scarantino for helpful comments on a draft of this response, and Frederick Eberhardt and Christopher Hitchcock for stimulating discussion. Funded in part by a Conte Center grant from NIMH.Additional details
- Eprint ID
- 89590
- DOI
- 10.1177/1754073918772092
- Resolver ID
- CaltechAUTHORS:20180912-151443744
- Caltech Conte Center for the Neurobiology of Social Decision Making
- NIH
- Created
-
2018-09-12Created from EPrint's datestamp field
- Updated
-
2021-11-16Created from EPrint's last_modified field