Share this on Facebook
download .zip with all pictures
> Labels are given to emotions because they exist and are relatable.
Labels are given so that we can communicate effectively and describe our emotional state. They aren’t given *because* emotions are relatable, they are given to *help facilitate* our ability to relate to one another’s emotions.
> Will power is what determines if a person can sink or swim which in itself is another emotion that can be labeled.
It might play a role in the process, but there’s nothing to indicate that that is all there is to it. Plenty of very disciplined folks have succumbed to depression.
That said, I don’t think Will power itself is an emotion. It might play an integral role in one’s emotional existence, but I’d think that it would be more accurate to describe it as the extent to which one is able to defy their emotions.
> Everyone isnt identical I agree, but to say emotions are different for everyone I would disagree.
There are plenty of studies supporting the idea that the way we sense and perceive the world around us (and within us) is largely dependent on a number of factors stemming from both nature and nurture. I don’t see any reason to assume that emotions are an exception to this rule.
> Maybe the triggers to these emotions are different but the emotions are the same such that everyone can put a name on them and understand. Kind of like the struggle of music in a deeper sense.
We can and have sourced most distinct emotions back to both their biological source and their psychological trigger. These are largely the same.
I don’t see how a common label inherently defines an identical experience. If we were raised to call a certain color blue or to associate a certain smell with gasoline, then we won’t question their identities. The color’s wavelength and the smell’s particles are the same for everyone, but the way our brain processes the raw sensation and translates it into our consciousness could, for all we know, be different. We’d both still call the color blue and the smell fishy, but what we see and smell could be completely different, and we’d never know.
Philosophically, this idea reaches back into socratic philosophy and influenced a good deal of human thought, with derivatives of the concept itself influencing folks like Descartes and Locke.
Unfortunately, from a scientific perspective, it might take a while until we get a definitive answer. There have been some interesting studies that might eventually help us get there ([Pasley’s and Knight’s research comes to mind](http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/01/31/scientists-decode-brain-waves-to-eavesdrop-on-what-we-hear/)), but we’re still far from finding an answer to this question.