this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
48 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8175 readers
547 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think expecting objective scientific evidence over something as subjective as a "type" is a bit much. How would one even go about proving causation in something as as complex as an emotion?
Since we don't understand the brain as a whole system, I admit we can't "prove causation" of anything yet. But we can attempt to understand it by analyzing what we can observe. Ancient astrologists couldn't discover the physical laws that govern how stars are created by observing them. But they did learn how the stars moved across the sky and had great predictive power when it came to their paths hundreds of years in the future. Even if all of their explanations were bunk, they were still able to etch out some understanding while science had yet to catch up.