First and Second Order Reactions

Shawn March 17, 2020 at 23:17 3175 views 9 comments

I hypothesize that from a cognitive perspective, human beings have primary and secondary reactions.

The first order reaction is mainly instinctual, emotional, and prone to conditioning. The second order reaction is where meta-beliefs take place.

I think, that human beings have primary and secondary; but, not tertiary reactions, given that second order reactions alter the emotional response of the first order reaction and vice versa.

What are your thoughts about this?

Comments (9)

god must be atheist March 17, 2020 at 23:26 #393227 0 likes

You want my primary, or secondary reaction to your OP?

The primary is that it makes my hair wants to escape my scalp.

The secondary is non-existent (MY secondary; I am not speaking for others), because please see my "agnosticism" thread. I tried to prove, inconclusively at best, that you must believe in something; but some people debunked my argument, and now I am freed to not believe anything.

Freedom is liberating, but it hurts.

Deleted User March 17, 2020 at 23:40 #393233 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

god must be atheist March 18, 2020 at 00:14 #393245 0 likes

Quoting tim wood

Beware binary, either-or, thinking.
Beware classification as an extension of binary thinking.
Beware thinking as avoidance of living.

... Beware thinking as a replacement for thinking.

jgill March 18, 2020 at 00:20 #393246 0 likes

Quoting Shawn

The first order reaction is mainly instinctual, emotional, and prone to conditioning. The second order reaction is where meta-beliefs take place.

Not being a philosopher I interpret this as instinctive (fight or flee), and thoughtful (typical low-pressured problem solving). Am I missing a subtlety? Is this philosophy? :roll:

god must be atheist March 18, 2020 at 00:38 #393250 0 likes

Quoting jgill

Is this philosophy?

Now, that's a doser of a question. We know "you can't step twice in a river with the same foot forward" is philosophy, but "what is our first response to events" takes thousands of years to debate whether it's philosophy or not.

I use the following practical guide to decide what's philosophy and what's something else:

"Philosophy... is a walk on a slippery rock, religion... is a light in fog. Philosophy... is a talk on some cereal box, religion... is a smile on a dog." -- Edie Brickell.

This actually gives more of a definition to religion than to philosophy... it gives some limitations to what philosophy has as characteristics (in the first of Brickell's sentences), but it gives no guiding descriptive meaning in its definition.

So... very sorry, but you are on your own in finding the answer to your question.

Shawn March 18, 2020 at 00:55 #393255 0 likes

Reply to jgill

It just is a philosophy of mind notion that might be elucidating if people thought of other people as behaviorist automata...

Pfhorrest March 27, 2020 at 06:49 #396670 0 likes

Quoting Wikipedia on 'Thinking, Fast and Slow'

The central thesis is a dichotomy between two modes of thought: "System 1" is fast, instinctive and emotional; "System 2" is slower, more deliberative, and more logical.

Todd B Stevens April 20, 2020 at 00:19 #403553 0 likes

I think the Stoics would agree with this proposition. We do not have control over a thing, merely control over our reaction to it.

180 Proof April 20, 2020 at 00:49 #403562 0 likes

Reply to Pfhorrest Bingo! :up: