emotions

So I'm concurrently taking a psych class for my major, "Human Emotion." We're discussing what is an emotion, what it's purpose/function is, etc etc. The theory is, that emotions serve some kind of adaptive, evolutionary purpose in solving problems, as a way of socially mediating, deprioritizes self interests in order to work toward a collective, to get the individual to engage with others through emotions, etc etc...

The point is, I think that the Penfield mood/emotion regulation box kind of throws off the whole natural process of emotion, not just because it activates certain neurotransmitters (which in fact, over time, can't really happen. If you fire off feel-good neurotransmitters on a regular basis, it stops having an effect. Take meth addicts for example.). But also because it the box takes out the whole "interaction" part of emotions. We feel emotions because something, but usually SOMEONE causes them. So we're left with spontaneous mood swings without having an actual person to tie them to.

Weird? Is it possible to actually experience some emotion without having a person connected to them?

But then again, culture also shapes your emotions. For example, the way we experience embarrassment isn't the same way that the Japanese experience it. So in the Android's world, where the culture is shaped by horrible, deathly dust, master-killing robot slaves, and worship of live animals... maybe this whole emotion thing doesn't need a person to ground those feelings in?

I dunno. Aiight off to Bear's Lair!