12.12.2012 Views

Who Needs Emotions? The Brain Meets the Robot

Who Needs Emotions? The Brain Meets the Robot

Who Needs Emotions? The Brain Meets the Robot

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

eware <strong>the</strong> passionate robot 343<br />

but this time with a special terminology to express it—from<br />

communication as a general phenomenon among animals to language<br />

as a specific form of communication among humans.<br />

Note that it is not my point to say that English has made<br />

<strong>the</strong> right absolute choices. I am simply observing that we do use<br />

<strong>the</strong> term vision for <strong>the</strong> processing of focused patterns of variations<br />

in light intensity whe<strong>the</strong>r in fly, octopus, bird, or human.<br />

In each creature, vision is served by a network of interacting<br />

mechanisms, but this network varies from species to species in<br />

ways related to <strong>the</strong> animal’s ecological niche. What humans lack<br />

in visual acuity <strong>the</strong>y may make up for in visual processes for face<br />

recognition and manual control. By contrast, although some<br />

people will use <strong>the</strong> term language loosely for any form of communication,<br />

most people will understand <strong>the</strong> sense of <strong>the</strong> claim<br />

that “Humans are <strong>the</strong> only creatures that have language;” yet,<br />

none would accept <strong>the</strong> claim that “Only humans have vision”<br />

unless vision were used in <strong>the</strong> metaphorical sense of “<strong>the</strong> ability<br />

to envision explicitly alternative futures and plan accordingly.”<br />

3. Again, all <strong>the</strong>se creatures are endowed with motivational systems—hunger,<br />

thirst, fear, sex, etc.—and we may trace <strong>the</strong> linkage<br />

of <strong>the</strong>se systems with developing cortical mechanisms as we<br />

trace our quasi-evolutionary sequence. However, are we to follow<br />

<strong>the</strong> analogy with vision and refer to <strong>the</strong> processes involved<br />

as “emotion” throughout, or should we instead follow <strong>the</strong> example<br />

of communication and suggest that emotion provides in<br />

some sense a special form of motivational system? Here, I do<br />

not think <strong>the</strong>re is <strong>the</strong> same consensus as <strong>the</strong>re is for vision or<br />

language. I choose <strong>the</strong> latter path, suggesting <strong>the</strong> following:<br />

Motivation ≈ Communication<br />

Emotion ≈ Language<br />

<strong>The</strong>re is this difference: whereas language seems to be restricted<br />

to humans alone, emotion seems to be less clear-cut. Following<br />

Darwin, we see expressions of emotion in dogs and monkeys,<br />

even if most people would not credit <strong>the</strong>m with <strong>the</strong> capability<br />

for <strong>the</strong> emotional nuances of a Jane Austen heroine.<br />

4. Much of <strong>the</strong> biological discussion of emotion has turned on <strong>the</strong><br />

distinction between “emotional behavior” and “emotional feelings.”<br />

“Emotional expression” adds ano<strong>the</strong>r dimension, where<br />

mammalian (especially primate) facial expressions are understood<br />

to signal <strong>the</strong> emotional state of <strong>the</strong> animal but distinguished<br />

from <strong>the</strong> emotional behavior itself (e.g., a fearful expression is

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!