Reply to comment

Throughout the semester I have noticed the way in which our class discussions have been mediated by the seemingly Western view of rational science. We devoted a significant number of earlier classes to the discussion of objectivity vs. subjectivity alone. What I don't understand is why we, as a class, and the larger scientific community want to create this dichotomy between objective/quantitative rationale and subjective/qualitative information. Who is to say that one is better than the other? We have learned in class that lauding the benefits of one method does not necessarily lessen the importance of another. Why should we keep emotions separate from the myriad other issues psychologists are studying today? Isn't the study of emotions what created modern American psychology as we know it? William James, heralded as "the father of American psychology", was obsessed with the study of emotions and fluctuations in mood. He had personal experience confronting "serious psychological difficulties" and this personal experience inspired him to study how his (and others, later on) own spirituality and consciousness related to physiology and neuroscience (how's that for objective experimentation?!). This eventually culminated in the evolution of American psychology. Unfortunately, Freud ruined the science of emotion for most psychologists and now even undergraduate psychology students don't dare whisper about emotions in a neurobiology class. It seems there is no place for emotions in our discussions of neural plasticity and consciousness- but that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense if you believe, as I clearly do, that they are all interrelated.

For a science (and I do believe psychology is a science, even when including emotions into the mix) with its roots in the study of the interconnectedness between emotion, spirituality, consciousness, AND physiology and neuroscience, how can emotions be left out of the discussion? It is disheartening to see that neurobiology- the metaphorical love-child of psychology and biology- has turned a blind eye to the role of emotions in cognition. Were emotions rejected/ignored from the field of study in an attempt to legitimize neurobiology and cement its place amongst the "hard sciences", like biology and chemistry, and to further distance it from the presumed "wishy-washy" abstract concept that has dominated the popular perception of psychology? Can emotions be incorporated into neurobiology without destroying its hard-science allure?