A Theory on Emotions and Actions ; A Short Essay.

This writing is to set the intuition and the philosophical foundations to my formulating of what I would call the emotion equation to our everyday actions. This emotion equation is, to me , an important aspect in our everyday life that is not been studied and ventured upon - at least to my knowledge. Behavioral economists have been conducting many researches to study one's irrationality but- at least to my knowledge again-  have yet come out with an empirical formula to depict generally how irrationality affect our behaviour or actions.I believe, that in making our everyday decisions or actions or even the manner we behave is a product of the aggregation of  two opposite elements in us ; one of which I would call the emotional side and the second the rational side. You may imagine them as a product or two vehicles colliding with each other or a chemical bonding between hydrogen and oxygen to produce H20 ; you can imagine it in any such form - at least for now.  As such, my emotional equation is aimed at depicting this product of the aggregation of the two opposite elements and how would this product affect our actions in return.

At this point of writing, I have only the slightest enlightenment to come out with that equation since after all is impossible to put values to our emotions. In effort to formulating that emotional equation, it is best for me to first describe my theory on emotions or literally , how we feel what we feel . As such , this short essay will be aimed at discussing that understanding. 

* note that I may have used emotions and feelings loosely in this writing but both is meant to be used to mean the same thing 

We , man can feel different things ( emotionally in this case) . We can feel , sad , happy , heartbroken , justified, excited or even tipsy if we happen to have drunk a little more than what our body can actually take. In fact , it is indeed a really long list of the possible feelings that we can feel - so much that it is impossible to list all of them. However, a closer inspection to all this different ways of us feeling will lead us to agree with the following statement : that man can only have two types of feeling or emotions ; positive emotions and negative emotions. Its shockingly simple but it is true. 

Positive emotions are simply emotions that make us feel good. Such feelings are like the feeling of being happy, confident , excited , courageous or even joyful. Negative emotions on the other hand would be feelings like sadness, loneliness, lack of confidence , cowardliness or even the feeling of hatred. Adding on to this two, is the idea of indifference where there it is a hypothetical state that we neither feel positively or negatively. It is to me, not a type of emotion since it is neither positive nor negative but rather a separate state of how we can possibly feel - feel nothing. This idea of feeling nothing is not by any means analogous to the idea of being indifferent or indifference as put forward in the microeconomics theory of utility. I will devote a section of writing to describe more about this hypothetical state of feeling nothing.

The question now is , how does these  two types of emotions or feelings affect our everyday actions? Perhaps we can probe this question with a simple model we shall call Model A.  In this Model A,  I reckon that positive motions will make us easier to commit into an action and a negative one will result otherwise. When we are happy we are likely to do something and if we are sad we are less likely to do something else. Such a conclusion is theoretically superficial and amateurish for a thinker attempting to formulate the apparent emotional equation. Such a model as described above is rather too simple and have weaknesses in it. However , we shall keep this in view first in case there is still some significance to it. 

As such, perhaps, we can come out with a different model , a Model B maybe. Since, the idea of when we are happy we are likely to do something and if we are sad we are less likely to do something else has a hasty generalization fallacy ( you could have guessed it by now ) , we would require a model with perhaps , metaphorically speaking, a level more sophisticated. This is after all, if we apply Model A , it wouldn't be the case where when we are happier we are more likely to commit suicide and when we are sad we are less likely to do so. Realistically it should be the other way round. Our Model B should be aimed at tackling this problem. As such, I reckon adding another dimension to the claim made earlier in Model A that is the dimension of relativeness. As such, Model B will go like this : If we are feeling positively relative to an action then we are more likely to commit the action and if we are feeling negatively relative to that same action we are less likely to commit the action. This claim here, now redefined from the previous claim in Model A is more sound and more realistic and it seemed plausible and true.

For example, it would be the case that if we are happy we are less likely to commit suicide and if we are sad we are more likely to commit suicide. Another example would be , if we feel confident that the economy will be good in the future, we are more likely to invest in long term bonds now ( since high GDP is related to higher bond returns / yields to maturity ) if we feel otherwise that the economy will not be good in the future we are less likely to invest in long term bonds now and probably invest in safer assets such as commodities like gold probably.

Still  I find a problem in making the statement made earlier to be wholly strong. By inspecting the action of drinking. We cannot necessarily say that it is always true that if we are happy we are less likely to drink and if we are sad we are more likely to drink . Since there would be cases that we drink more when we party happily and such cases would make our Model B difficult to be justified. As such, to make Model B more sound, we should also add that the nature of the action in relation to the feeling will also determine how the feeling affect the action. If we are drinking in the negative sense, then , if we are feeling sad we are more likely to drink . If we are drinking in the positive sense, then, if we are feeling happy, we are more likely to drink. 

All in all , the three claims or preposition that we have come out with through this writing is that :

1. Positive feelings make it more likely for us to do something and negative feelings otherwise
2. However, the idea of relativity must be added that positive feelings in relation to the action will make us more likely to do the action and negative feelings otherwise
3. Lastly, the nature of the action in relation to the feeling itself will also determine how the feeling influence the action. 

In all philosophical endeavours, it is always best to prove it via a empirical model to make it ever sounder. We have seen that Hobbe's Leviathan can be modelled into a prisoner's dilemma game matrix. We shall also attempt in proving our three established claims made in this earlier. As such, I reckon the empirical proof as follows : 

Based on the above empirical model , we can see that it would really fit the three preposition that we have come out with earlier. For example, given a positive feeling towards an action of the positive sense, it is more likely for us to do it denoted by its positive derivative. Given a positive feeling towards an action of the negative sense it is less likely for us to do it , denoted by its negative derivative. This also applies for its negative feeling counterpart. 

I must express here that the findings in this part of writing is not be any means a new discovery. Like the curse of philosophy goes that : what we read in philosophy writings is that it may be sophisticatedly explained and  deliberated but yet it is something we have known but not only recognized it consciously. My readers here would indeed feel the same. Likewise, the model above is telling us something that we have known. It is not something new.Also the findings from this writing will be a foundation to my further writings unless a revise is needed as I try to formulate the emotional equation.

Also, note that ,based on the picture at the beginning of this writing, it is identified that there is a though element along the process in making an action possible. In the next writing I would engage philosophically
in deliberating the "thought" element.