"Do we genuinely feel things?"
In what other way can we feel things than genuinely? Feeling --either physical or mental (emotion)-- is an experience. Can an experience be non genuine, i.e. false or fake or imaginary? You feel something or you don't. If I say to you that "I'm angry", you can't tell me "This is not true" or "It's only your imagination", and that sort of thing.

Or do I miss something? :chin:

IT's not missing anything. It's sort of like saying that society makes you feel ways about certain things. If you took someone not raised in the world we live in today they wouldn't care about any of the stuff in it or what's going on, why? Because society makes us care about things that we normally wouldn't.

You spend enough time in meditation, you will realize that you never genuinely feel feelings in the first place
it is all just cause and effect response
and a lot of the time the specificity of that response is ascribed to how societal expectations dictate one should be effected by a particular cause
loss-->sadness
gain-->joy

It's something I can't get over because to deny it would be living a lie and telling yourself what you feel is genuine.

society makes you feel ways about certain things. ... society makes us care about things that we normally wouldn't. — Darkneos

Yest, I got that and your viewpoint in the first place by reading your description of the topic.
I just viewed the question "Do we genuinely feel things?" from a simpler aspect. In its essence. Indepedently of what external factors cause feelings. There can be millions of them. And why society in particular? Your wife or husband or family or a a friend may make you feel a certain way. On purpose or not. Even ourselves --out subconscious-- make us feel things that are not natural; for no apparent or real reason.
In every case, i.e. independenty of the cause, the fact is that we feel them. And what we feel is genuine.
Maybe the title of the topic is misleading then ...

it is all just cause and effect response.
and a lot of the time the specificity of that response is ascribed to how societal expectations dictate one should be effected by a particular cause
loss-->sadness
gain-->joy — Darkneos

Yes, of course there's always a cause for every feeling. And indeed, grief is caused by loss. Not only in humans but in animals too. Maybe in plants too, if we accept the belief that they feel too.

Also, I know, by experience on the subject of emotions, that what society makes us feel is of much less importance and has much less consequences for us than what people around us, and esp. close ones, cause us. On purpose or not. Almost all traumas in our lives are created by people, esp. family, since the time we are born.

Yest, I got that and your viewpoint in the first place by reading your description of the topic.
I just viewed the question "Do we genuinely feel things?" from a simpler aspect. In its essence. Indepedently of what external factors cause feelings. There can be millions of them. And why society in particular? Your wife or husband or family or a a friend may make you feel a certain way. On purpose or not. Even ourselves --out subconscious-- make us feel things that are not natural; for no apparent or real reason.
In every case, i.e. independenty of the cause, the fact is that we feel them. And what we feel is genuine.
Maybe the title of the topic is misleading then ... — Alkis Piskas

But it's caused by something so it's not genuine. How our family makes you feel is based on how society says you ought to feel about it.

Also, I know, by experience on the subject of emotions, that what society makes us feel is of much less importance and has much less consequences for us than what people around us, and esp. close ones, cause us. On purpose or not. Almost all traumas in our lives are created by people, esp. family, since the time we are born. — Alkis Piskas

Which again is impacted based on how society says we ought to feel about certain things.

But it's caused by something so it's not genuine. How our family makes you feel is based on how society says you ought to feel about it. — Darkneos

I see now what you mean. But everything is caused by something. So, according to your point, nothing is genuine!

Definition of "genuine" from Merriam-Webster dictionary (copy-pasted):
1a: actually having the reputed or apparent qualities or character
1b: actually produced by or proceeding from the alleged source or author the signature is genuine
1c: sincerely and honestly felt or experienced a deep and genuine love
1d: ACTUAL, TRUE
2: free from hypocrisy or pretense : SINCERE

So, a feeling is not genuine, only if it is false, faked, insincere, pretended, etc. Which is irrelevant to our subject ...

Then by that dictionary definition we do genuinely feel things.

Then by that dictionary definition we do genuinely feel things. — Darkneos

Right. This is what I said.
But why "this dictionary"? This is what I picked. You can pick another one ...

What are you getting at? What she meant by genuine and what I meant are two different things. She meant it like uncaused cause, and I said how you fee in response to something that happens to us. We found out we were talking past each other.

What she meant by genuine and what I meant are two different things.. — Darkneos

Who is "she"? In fact, your message has nothing to do with what I have said so far. Most probably you are responding to someone else's message than mine ...

You spend enough time in meditation, you will realize that you never genuinely feel feelings in the first place
it is all just cause and effect response

An unstated premise is that if your feelings are cause and effect response, the feelings aren't genuine. Is there anything else we would say is not genuine because it is involved in chain of causes and effects?

But if you are being affected or influenced by something else then it's not genuine, you're being controlled. — Darkneos

If the world is deterministic, then everything is being controlled, in this sense.

I think the deeper question would be about how can we decide if this or that reaction is genuine. What does that criterion mean?

Can one change in such a way that our reactions are more genuine?

I think one can. I have experienced that. I realized that I was suppressing certain reactions, for example, because of societal or cultural norms. Through generallyl slow processes I was able to test my way to not longer going along with these. I still had reactions that were in a cause and effect chain, but one that feels better and feels more aligned with my nature.

I think most people will see some people as just trying to align themselves with norms while others try to feel there way into these norms (and think about them) to see if they actually fit them.

I think we all have a sense that person X congratulated us on gradutating or having a kid and it felt like someone going through the motions or performing a norm and someone who was genuinely happy. Or someone who managed to express something against the norm in those situations. Perhaps they thought we had a child too young or with the wrong person and even though you're not supposed to be honest, they were.

I think there is a meaningful distinction here around genuine feelings and not so geniune responses. And not, the feelings are probably real, even in people who try to suppress any 'wrong' reaction and present themselves 'correctly'. They have whatever they are feeling as feelings - though they may not want to notice what those feelings are if they don't fit. So, they may think they are happy you are happy with your new partner when really they are jealous. But their responses, the whole mess of it, is genuine, it just may not match their official position on what they are feeling.

"she" is the person who made the quote originally.

I think we all have a sense that person X congratulated us on gradutating or having a kid and it felt like someone going through the motions or performing a norm and someone who was genuinely happy. Or someone who managed to express something against the norm in those situations. Perhaps they thought we had a child too young or with the wrong person and even though you're not supposed to be honest, they were.

I think there is a meaningful distinction here around genuine feelings and not so geniune responses. And not, the feelings are probably real, even in people who try to suppress any 'wrong' reaction and present themselves 'correctly'. They have whatever they are feeling as feelings - though they may not want to notice what those feelings are if they don't fit. So, they may think they are happy you are happy with your new partner when really they are jealous. But their responses, the whole mess of it, is genuine, it just may not match their official position on what they are feeling. — Bylaw

I think there is a difference between someone faking it and someone who means it. Like people who congratulate you on something, because that's what you're supposed to do. But there's saying that and meaning it, which I think is what she might be alluding to but misses the point. Society dictates one should be happy about such events, but obviously that doesn't happen. We go through the motions. Whether you feel happy or not depends on your connection with the other person. If it's someone close then yes you'll be happy for them, but if not then you phone it in.

Also if she was right there wouldn't be so many therapists with clients who feel things they aren't supposed to. Reminds me of the time I told my therapist I stopped loving my mom and felt bad because it seemed like I was supposed to do that, then he said it's ok. IT was a relief.

But to state, in our convo we had two definitions of what genuine meant. She meant it as some uncaused cause, I meant it as how you actually feel in response to something. Like if you get a gift are you actually happy about it or just putting on a show for their benefit.

I think there is a difference between someone faking it and someone who means it. Like people who congratulate you on something, because that's what you're supposed to do. — Darkneos

Of course there is, and we all recognize the difference, even while we also go through the courteous motions, for the sake of social harmony. Even if one doesn't much care about a stranger's achievement, to refrain from congratulating them would be an insult and cause ill-feeling.

But there's saying that and meaning it, which I think is what she might be alluding to but misses the point. — Darkneos

What I read her saying is not that you deliberately fake some emotions - which we already knew with no help from meditation - but that all the ones you actually do feel are fake; manufactured and implanted by a nebulous external entity called "society".

What I read her saying is not that you deliberately fake some emotions - which we already knew with no help from meditation - but that all the ones you actually do feel are fake; manufactured and implanted by a nebulous external entity called "society". — Vera Mont

But that can't be true because then where did society get that from?

Of course there is, and we all recognize the difference, even while we also go through the courteous motions, for the sake of social harmony. Even if one doesn't much care about a stranger's achievement, to refrain from congratulating them would be an insult and cause ill-feeling. — Vera Mont

I would think faking it would hurt more. Nothing stings more than someone who is "just being nice".

But that can't be true because then where did society get that from? — Darkneos

Didn't I ask that about eight times since page 1?

I would think faking it would hurt more. Nothing stings more than someone who is "just being nice". — Darkneos

Stinging nettles, alcohol on a cut, wasps, lemon juice in your eye, scorpion fish.... I've actually never suffered from a kind or generous sentiment, given or received, even when it was not strictly true.

In any case, the OP question was "Do we genuinely feel things?" not "Are all the feelings we express genuine?"

I guess we do genuinely feel things. I'm also not really sure how society makes us feel things, if it did then why doesn't it work for everyone.

I'm also not really sure how society makes us feel things, if it did then why doesn't it work for everyone. — Darkneos

Because society is legion. It is diverse, has many needs and interests, contains many kinds of people, whose needs and interests are even more diverse. It works like a field a wheat: when the wind blows, most of the stalks bend in the same direction, but not to the same depth or in the same curve or at the same speed, so there are always ripples and eddies. The whole is saved by having this facility to bend and doing it more or less in unison, but there are always a few casualties - stalks that can never straighten up again. When the wind is not blowing, each plant is an individual, competing with others immediately around it for water and nutrients, yet dependent on the security of the field for its survival.
Society doesn't make us do, say or feel anything. It rewards socially constructive behaviour and penalizes antisocial behaviour. Or rather, we appoint individuals to the task of disciplining members who may be harmful to us all.

We genuinely feel basic emotions on the individual level, and we genuinely share some part of the sentiments, cultural biases and loyalties of our collective, but we are also often injured by the genuine expressions of feelings of other members, which is harmful to the collective as well as individuals. So we join a social contract (consciously at the age of majority) to curb destructive and unwelcome emotions, as well as feign, where appropriate, the ones that bolster our social solidarity.

actually I have to take that back, this proved you wrong:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00896/full

this proved you wrong: — Darkneos

On the contrary: it seems to be reiterating, in less picturesque and more rigorous language, that humans are social animals, interacting in complex ways with one another, their immediate environment and larger society. Nowhere have I ever said that each emotion is isolated or uncaused.

On the contrary: it seems to be reiterating, in less picturesque and more rigorous language, that humans are social animals, interacting in complex ways with one another, their immediate environment and larger society. Nowhere have I ever said that each emotion is isolated or uncaused. — Vera Mont

No I meant that its society brainwashing, proving you wrong that you said it isn't so.

No I meant that its society brainwashing, proving you wrong that you said it isn't so. — Darkneos

*sigh!* OK

What? You're not gonna deny it?

I'm too seasick from going around in circles.

I think there is a difference between someone faking it and someone who means it. — Darkneos

Me too. I was likely not clear.

If it's someone close then yes you'll be happy for them, but if not then you phone it in. — Darkneos

Or if you simply have a different reaction even though you are close.

Reminds me of the time I told my therapist I stopped loving my mom and felt bad because it seemed like I was supposed to do that, then he said it's ok. IT was a relief. — Darkneos

Right, and I think the transition from less genuine to more genuine like that is telling. You can't really doubt that this can happen after having such an experience.

Our senses and understanding are fallible. Our senses give us experience due to the energies or objects of the physical world creating alterations to our body, thus informing bodily consciousness; for it is through the body we come to know an apparent reality. Our apparent reality is made up of reactions to these outer energies or objects, telling us more about our sensory experience than about the energies or objects in and of themselves. So, apparent reality is a biological readout, as much dependent upon the energies/objects of our outer world as it is on the perceptions of their alterations to our bodies.

So, our apparent reality is not what is out there in and of itself, the ultimate reality; it is the mixture of energies and their effects upon us. Other individuals are part of our outer world as objects themselves and they, like yourself are energy forms. Just as their being affect us as energies altering our biology their emotional expressions are also energies affecting us in a similar way and processed through our understanding gives their energies add emphasis and interpretations as to whether this incoming energy is life supporting or life negating. It is all interpretation of energy and unfortunately fallible.

Our senses and understanding are fallible. Our senses give us experience due to the energies or objects of the physical world creating alterations to our body, thus informing bodily consciousness; for it is through the body we come to know an apparent reality. Our apparent reality is made up of reactions to these outer energies or objects, telling us more about our sensory experience than about the energies or objects in and of themselves. So, apparent reality is a biological readout, as much dependent upon the energies/objects of our outer world as it is on the perceptions of their alterations to our bodies. — boagie

Quite interesting.
This text is written in a literary and official style. Far from everyday style, which I'm used to read in here and other free discussion places.
Not that it really matters, but out of interest: Are you a writer? And are you often using this kind of style for commenting in these discussions?

We genuinely feel basic emotions on the individual level, and we genuinely share some part of the sentiments, cultural biases and loyalties of our collective, but we are also often injured by the genuine expressions of feelings of other members — Vera Mont

I can see if the expression is violent or some kind of act in the world - like making up stuff about someone on the internet. But do you include expressing emotions in sound, facial expressions, posture. Like screaming in grief, say.

But do you include expressing emotions in sound, facial expressions, posture. Like screaming in grief, say. — Bylaw

I don't see how grief can injure other people. But derision and mockery can; expressions of contempt, envy and anger can and does hurt feelings, and thus cause resentment, enmity, perhaps some form of retribution - which ripples outward, affecting kin, friends and bystanders, which is disruptive of the social harmony.
And that is why children are taught to control their temper and refrain from laughing at another's disability, physical or mental shortcomings, not to say they hate people, even if they do feel that way. Emotions are of the moment; social interdependence is for the long term.

I don't see how grief can injure other people. — Vera Mont

Ok, that's good, common ground.

But derision and mockery can — Vera Mont

A couple of things with these two related acts: 1) they are more than expression of emotion. There would likely be verbal content in there. The person is not simply expressing emotion, but finding a way to communicate negative things about the other person or at least what they are doing. Of course, no society rules out derision. It would just be sanctioned for some things and not others. Wherever one sits on the political spectrum there are, within one's subgroup expressions of derision that are acceptable. And there are likely some in common. Someone advocating for pedophilia would meet derision and that derision would generally be seen as fine. That doesn't entail that derision in general is ok, but it's already got it's place. 2) Derision can hurt feelings, yes. And I think it's especially powerful in relation to children. That said, I don't think we can expect to protect each other from hurt feelings. Systematic derision, especially from adults towards children, well, that should be treated, I think, by intervention, but also by expressions of anger and perhaps derision aimed at people who do this. I say, we can't expect to protect people from hurt feelings. We also don't do this. And I think the whole pattern shifts if we move towards also allowing those with hurt feelings (so generally some mix of fear, sadness and anger) to express those feelings. These feeling are also suppressed in society and that hurts. Suppressing feelings in general hurts. Not getting to express feelings hurts. People choosing not to be your friend hurts. Not making the basketball team hurts. Failing a math test hurts. We are allowed to do all sorts of things that hurt people's feelings. And it would hurt feelings if we couldn't, either immediately or down the line in the future.

envy and anger can and does hurt feelings — Vera Mont

So, I have a similar reaction to these. Envy is a complicated cognitive reaction. There are emotions and also thoughts mingled in it. I think expressing those feelings does not add to the problem. Envy often leads to all sorts of passive aggressive behavior, trash talking people, undermining them. For the person themselves, not expressing the emotions (by themselves, with others) is a very unpleasant stagnant state. It's not really going anywhere. Actually expressing envy even to the person you are envious of, is actually a rather bold and honest move. It's a pretty vulnerable thing to do. I am angry at you and hurt because you have that girlfriend, got that raise, can jump higher than me. Perhaps with accusations of unfairness. If the other person can actually express their emotions, maybe the whole thing can move somewhere. But I see no reason to believe that holding in those emotions creates a net good.

And of course it wouldn't be good if tomorrow we all just let loose. But I do think the culture would be healthier if we moved in baby steps in the direction of expressing feelings, without jumping into action based them. I think a lot of violence is because we do not have middle ground (especially as men) to express feelings, including so called negative ones, so at a certain point there is the jump from suppressed rage (and other emotions converted to rage because they are scarier for some men), to violence.

And that is why children are taught to control their temper — Vera Mont

I think we have had these judgments so long it just seems true that these things must be suppressed.

and refrain from laughing at another's disability, physical or mental shortcomings, — Vera Mont

Again this is a complicated act not a simple expression of emotion. The person who does this, even a child, needs to feel superior to someone else and likely has not expressed their feelings of fear, anger and sadness about the way they are parented, failures in school or social life, feelings of inadequacy. We keep pointing to where the pressure bursts through and think we need to build better walls, without ever finding out what it would be like if we accepted emotions in general. And where I have been mocked by other children, I vastly preferred that to when it was suppressed by still present. To be held outside, dealt with more coldly. They are thinking the same things, but not saying them. Much better for me to hear it and be able to get pissed off and even sad, instead of living in this nebulous emotion fog where my emotions seem like reactions to things that aren't real. Or might not be real. Other people's reactions don't go away, they just go underground and still have effects. Also, we have to deal with all that then. If some kids feel like mocking a child for being disabled or whatever and we manage to get them not to express that, they are still not dealing with the roots of all that. They are behaving better on the surface. Where is that urge coming from? What happens if they express this and then the disabled child expresses rage and sadness back or his or her parents do? Or they all get together. I think there's this real pessimism and hopelessness in this collective decision to selectively suppress our emotions. And we are avoiding actually learning.

Don't get me wrong. There's dark stuff in here. Caution is the watchword. And we need to get comfortable with our own emotions, alone, generally before we run around and plop it on strangers - which happens anyway, in part because of all the suppression. First with ourselves, then with people we trust immensely, then....and so on outward.

not to say they hate people, even if they do feel that way — Vera Mont

I used to find that horrifying, to hear that or express it. But the truth is we feel that. And if we are ever going to deal with things like the chasm between men and women, we are going to have to express that stuff. And to manage to listen. I can now hear that aimed at me and know that this feeling, like the others, comes and goes. And I can then with the other person see what is going on at root.

This is huge. It's long process and one we are engaging in. A hundred years ago men and women both had narrower ranges of emotions they were allowed to express and generally expressed less.

Emotions are of the moment; social interdependence is for the long term. — Vera Mont

But I think we are going to have to finally get to an honest interdependence based on full honesty. Slowly, carefully. Because while the moment you suppress a so-called negative emotion may seem improved, it didn't just go away. It's underneath, keeping away real intimacy, ready to pop out when the pressure builds, keeping you in a jailor/prisoner relation with yourself, adding this secret distance and I think actually contributing to violence and a lack of compassion.