http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/09/08/when-suboptimal-is-better/ a blog by Mark Essel on web technology, startups and design philosophy Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/09/08/when-suboptimal-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-2256 Mark Essel Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:27:13 +0000 http://www.victusspiritus.com/?p=1531#comment-2256 Aye Jim, you hit the nail on the head. Emotions are only suboptimal in a localized sense (they can certainly distract you from an immedite goal). But in the greater sense, as a surviving species, we are living examples of emotional value in not only our existence, but in the richness and depth of our shared experience. Aye Jim, you hit the nail on the head. Emotions are only suboptimal in a localized sense (they can certainly distract you from an immedite goal). But in the greater sense, as a surviving species, we are living examples of emotional value in not only our existence, but in the richness and depth of our shared experience.

]]> http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/09/08/when-suboptimal-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-2255 Jim Dwulit Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:01:50 +0000 http://www.victusspiritus.com/?p=1531#comment-2255 I do not see suboptimal. If being an emotional creature invokes stronger survival abilities is that not optimal? Why do you consider emotions sub optimal? I believe that new AI and psych studies do not separate emotions and intelligence -- in fact the opposite -- you need emotions for intelligence. (I am referring to species intelligence here not individual). So emotions are not SUBoptimal -- they are optimal. <br>Just my nickels worth. I do not see suboptimal. If being an emotional creature invokes stronger survival abilities is that not optimal? Why do you consider emotions sub optimal? I believe that new AI and psych studies do not separate emotions and intelligence — in fact the opposite — you need emotions for intelligence. (I am referring to species intelligence here not individual). So emotions are not SUBoptimal — they are optimal.
Just my nickels worth.

]]> http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/09/08/when-suboptimal-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-807 Mark Essel Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:27:13 +0000 http://www.victusspiritus.com/?p=1531#comment-807 Aye Jim, you hit the nail on the head. Emotions are only suboptimal in a localized sense (they can certainly distract you from an immedite goal). But in the greater sense, as a surviving species, we are living examples of emotional value in not only our existence, but in the richness and depth of our shared experience. Aye Jim, you hit the nail on the head. Emotions are only suboptimal in a localized sense (they can certainly distract you from an immedite goal). But in the greater sense, as a surviving species, we are living examples of emotional value in not only our existence, but in the richness and depth of our shared experience.

]]> http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/09/08/when-suboptimal-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-806 Jim Dwulit Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:01:50 +0000 http://www.victusspiritus.com/?p=1531#comment-806 I do not see suboptimal. If being an emotional creature invokes stronger survival abilities is that not optimal? Why do you consider emotions sub optimal? I believe that new AI and psych studies do not separate emotions and intelligence -- in fact the opposite -- you need emotions for intelligence. (I am referring to species intelligence here not individual). So emotions are not SUBoptimal -- they are optimal. <br>Just my nickels worth. I do not see suboptimal. If being an emotional creature invokes stronger survival abilities is that not optimal? Why do you consider emotions sub optimal? I believe that new AI and psych studies do not separate emotions and intelligence — in fact the opposite — you need emotions for intelligence. (I am referring to species intelligence here not individual). So emotions are not SUBoptimal — they are optimal.
Just my nickels worth.

]]>