19. Emotions and behavior

Emotions have a major influence on our behavior, that much is certain. In certain situations it is even noticeable that behavior becomes problematic because of the emotion attached to it. On the other hand, the effect of emotions can also be very positive. This is my hypothesis:

Emotions, such as pain and pleasure, are signal mechanisms. They inform us if there is a danger (negative) or if something meets a need (positive). The negative signals trigger our alarm system (amygdala), the second type releases a number of hormones that generate a good feeling (serotonin and others). This does not mean that the first type is always bad (unproductive) and the second type is always good (useful).

If there is insufficient respect for important needs or values in a situation , this is signaled emotionally, with a certain intensity. This attracts our attention and provides the necessary motivation. When we talk about the ideal solution for a problem, and we describe a positive future, we become enthusiastic. Here too, emotion supports our focus and motivation. The danger, in both cases, is in the dosage.

If the emotion becomes the determining driving force, and determines the direction and approach to work on solutions and progress, then things are likely to go wrong. Emotions then set in motion the fast system in our brain (1), and we will develop simplified scripts, make proposals, initiate actions. The dog is loose! Self-control is missing to keep seeing the whole picture. The focus narrows and a lot of information about possible consequences, desired goals, alternative roads, side effects, long-term effects, etc. is overlooked. The behavior that follows is without any doubt driven by the ego of the person involved. It’s the work of the ‘reflex brain’, that we share with mammals.

It follows that emotions in behavior very quickly lead to polarity in relationships. Following and satisfying the (inner) emotion takes the place of responsible goal-oriented or value-driven action. The result is that the person's narrowed focus is emotionally set against that of the other person who advocates a different approach with different emotions. The stronger the emotion behind a behavior, the stronger the polarity. It is the driving force behind a conflict. A conflict is a difference of opinion, vision, style, ... that got out of hand due to an emotional charge on one or both sides, so that the contradiction shifts to the personal level. In this sense, idealists and leaders with strong 'theatrical neurosis' are just as polarizing as people with an exaggerated urge for empathic solidarity or people who display an excessive controlling behavior driven by fear. Emotions have the potential to mess up relationships and distort the content of our behavior. Without strict monitoring, that danger is constantly present.

People who, due to the influence of black pedagogy (2), have a highly active emotional system will of course have more problems with this. As long as they are aware of this and accept being alerted, it can still be  manageable and the damage can be limited, be it at the expense of extra time and energy. If that is not possible because one of the involved partner does not allow it, a cooperation problem will arise. Not allowing this 'self-reflective correction' is rooted in the cognitive dissonance of the person involved. Because the emotion is overwhelming, the person has, out of pure self-preservation, developed a belief that says it is OK to do so. This belongs to the 'psychological immune system' that people develop (rightly) to be able to bear the result of upbringing (black pedagogy) due to all kinds of imperfections in their 'being'. The heavier the emotional damage that underlies the 'unproductive behavior', the stronger the emotion will act as a driver for triggering cognitive dissonance for protection. The amygdala in our brain starts the alarm and the most primary reflexes of self-defense come on, including aggression towards the messenger. It can take many years (and sometimes it never happens) to replace this artificial self-defense with acceptance and resignation, as a result of which a stronger maturity ensures targeted action, based on self-knowledge and self-control.

It is questionable to read advice that comes down to the 'follow your emotions' line. It is clear that emotions deserve attention because of their signal function. But if they (may) take over the situation, the debacle will be close. Self-control is missing, targeting is lacking, responsibility for consequences is not taken, nuances are missing and cooperation becomes impossible due to increasing polarity. Too strong an emotion at the basis of behavior is not OK! They require attention, not to follow them, but to bring them within the limits of their useful effect as quickly as possible. The ultimate behavior will then often deviate from what the emotion prescribes, and if that leaves the emotion unsatisfied, there is work to be done to dose that 'emotion turbo', possibly structurally.

If we accept and encourage human cooperation to be reduced to emotional interaction, then polarity will increase, cooperation will decrease and most energy will be lost in fighting differences or seeking "social comfort" in mutual acceptance . It goes without saying that this is at the expense of the quality of the whole. The fact that emotional harmony deserves the necessary attention to make collaboration possible as a basic condition, we accept and confirm that. But: motions determine the limits for constructive treatment of the content!

This view cannot of course be scientifically proven, but in addition to countless personal observations, this coherence seems logical. It also fits with insights from literature, which do have a good scientific basis, such as :

(1)    (1)    Daniel Kahneman , Thinking fast and slow, Penguin Books, 2012

(2)    ‘Black Pedagogy’ is a term that was launched by Alice Miller about the influence of education patterns on the adult personality. See a summary on: https://www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwikre2Kv7fXAhWSGuwKHaVdAL8QFghBMAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.waaromtoch.be%2F&usg=AOvVaw2rqt_vs29RDVR4L5dJnFgm

(3)    Walter Mischel , The Marshmallow test, Little, Brown & Co., New York, 2014

(4)    Charles Jacobs, Management rewired, Penguin Group, New York, 2009

Hugo Der Kinderen (  August 2019)