Index
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Consequence as fact would not seem conducive to Emotion. Does one get emotional of the sun for shining, the clouds for raining, the wind for blowing ? If lightening hits one's house, that's a different story. The Conservative may think lightening does what it does, while the progressive loses one's mind.
Foundation Reasoning is based on evidence and facts. It would be said that the Ego would have a propensity for Foundation Reasoning, being that said-Ego is responsible for the health and safety of the body and where accuracy of the dynamics of one's environment would be paramount. Consequence is matter of fact. Optimum Correspondence and Foundation Reasoning would seem more in line with Natural Affection than Emotion.
A big player of Emotion would be expectation and especially the disappointment of same. Expectation is objectives in future. One expects for qualities and conditions to be at least the same tomorrow as today . Something less a disappointment. Something more might be of some exuberance. To the extent that expectation is of Consequence is to the extent it would affect Emotion. If one were not of Consequential expectation Emotion would be nullified. Gambling is betting on future expectation and to the degree the bet is Consequential, would be the degree of emotional outcome. Natural Affection would apply when expectation is relatively the same as what already is. Emotion would apply when expectation is more or less of that which already is.
When the Authority is good no evidence pertaining the good is necessary since it is self-evidence that good would always be good case closed. When the Authority is evil of course no evidence against evil is necessary, since it is self-evident that evil did whatever is claimed because that's what evil does.
Intelligence (17 of 19)
Next Page
