This is a commonly debated topic and especially one that plays a large role in relationships and gender issues.

It seems the sensible approach is to seek balance between the two all the while continuing to educate ourselves on the biological factors that drive emotion.

Tilting too far to either side proves detrimental.

GS

In my opinion there is no "vs", because every way of thinking is guided by adequate feeling. Therefore is thinking always influenced by the feeling.

The way how is feeling coded to human brain is influenced by the method of learning what is "right" and "wrong". We usually see that in different cultures are "right" different things and these are guided by adequate feeling. Not because there is only one way of thinking "right", it is just because people got the code to have adequate attitude about it.

When it comes to the edge and people make always decisions based on what is "right", they will just always do what is right for their brain to feel about it.

The key to handle our brain is to look even for unpleasant challenges if it comes to think about our future, because it influences how we will feel next time.

With the exception of "Judging vs perception" - I would say yes, each of those modes are separable.

Don't see how you can judge separate from your perception, isn't judgement based on perceived thoughts?

[/QUOTE]Which of these is of more importance?[/QUOTE]

Importance is subjective to each example -- more important would likely be based on which is likely to get us our hoped for result. If you think of yourself as an emotional person, and are pleased with that idea, it is more likely then not that you will value the emotional mode more, correct?

[/QUOTE]Is an intelligent decision not based on emotional motivation?[/QUOTE]

Yes, it does appear that we have an emotional motivation behind even our most intelligent decision. Infact, rare is the person who knows him/herself well enough to know how much importance to give the emotional connect.

[/QUOTE]And are emotional sensibilities not a product of the innate intellect?[/QUOTE]

No sure what an innate intellect is. Smarts we are unaware of having?
Those times when the after thought is that it was an innact reaction do not seem to often be a part of our intellect at all.

[/QUOTE]Which is of greater concern and much more progressive?[/QUOTE]

My first response would be to have balance in all things. Just enough emotion and just enough intellect would appear to lead to a well balanced life. But then I had a Budhist thought about "enlightenment" -- and things get a little fussy from that view point.



[/QUOTE]Intellectual understanding versus emotional contentment? [/QUOTE]

Ahhh, the secret is to gain emotional contentment from intellectual understanding.

Lost1

He who is ruled by emotion, are prone to hate and fear, he who is prone to hate and fear ..sow chaos!

This translates to, if you let emotions rule your judgement, the judgement can be heavily influenced by hate or love, which can result in discrimination or comradery/favoritism, however the judgement should consider the emotional impact.
Therefore emotional sensibilities has little to do with innate intellect.

Well said. Kudos!:a-ok:

William

Seeking balance seems intuitive, but I think it the wrong way to go about it. We are already tilted very far to the feeling side. If you seek balance you will end up unbalanced.

The feeling part is there to stay, it's natural and instinctive. All of our intentional effort has to go towards reason and rationality. That is how feelings are best understood and managed, and even then feeling will be in control. I can't think of a good analogy, but it is a bit like giving a starving man a pizza and warning him not to think to rationally about how much he should eat.

The subject in my Civics class today was drugs. I said "Drugs are not bad." Almost everyone in the room (even the teacher) reacted in disgust. I had no chance to defend my statement.

Group mentality+feelings>logic?

I must agree ..wholly.

After reading this thread it made me think of an article from physorg *exactly* pertaining to this question which I have often pondered on my own.

Enjoy:

Trust your heart: Emotions may be more reliable when making choices

Additionally, the personality test mainly used by occupational therapists and HR people called the myer-briggs type indicator delineates thinking from feeling.

I often notice in lectures *especially* in math the professors I had that made emotional references I would remember more.

The best life's work is found in doing something you have passion for is it not? In those cases it's never intelligence vs emotion -- it's emotion forcing your to seek intelligence.

Lost1

I think this is the false division again. You have to know when to trust your heart. You wouldn't publish a study that says "trust your eyesight: vision may be more reliable at determining what is out there than thinking". Both feeling and seeing are our base states. But we have to know when our feelings are irrational, and when what we are seeing is a mirage.

The myers-briggs indicator describes tendencies people have.

Our thoughts and beliefs strongly effect our feelings. There is a whole field of therapy revolving our this I believe. So if I feel a certain way about something, you might say I should trust that feeling. But if I think about it, and feel a new way, shouldn't I then trust that feeling? But then, what I'm really trusting is my thinking.

They are much more memorable aren't they? More interesting. Most memorable are things that involve you. If you are asked a question in class you are much more likely to remember it on the exam.

I posted something very much like this response earlier, so I hope you'll forgive me if I repeat myself.

Like it or not, consider it or not, we human beings are still highly primal creatures, often depending on gut instinct over intellect, something that the media hasn't helped change at all. You see it all the time in movies; the hero risks his life and the lives of others he cares for to save his mate. He abandons intellect, and goes solely for his emotional response to the situation at large.

That being said, I can't dictate the importance of one over the other. An intellectual response to a situation is rational, and usually based on what we know. When mankind first came into existence, we didn't intelligently think, "Hmm... I think I'm hungry." We went on a gut instinct, observing the creatures around us, and we learned how to eat and how to communicate through emotions.