[here today]

Hurt is a topic that can come up a lot in therapy and was the topic of a recent poll here.

But it's a question that has often puzzled me because for a long time I had my "hurt feelings" disconnected/dissociated and didn't consciously feel them, although I seem to have had various ways of dealing with whatever it is that would have led me to feeling "hurt", if I could have felt it back then.

More basic questions may be "What is pain? Why do we have it?" There may be some people who don't feel physical pain. And if they don't then it would be hard to explain to them what pain "is", I think. Certainly pain can be a "pain" to deal with sometimes. But without it we would probably be more likely to re-damage damaged parts of ourselves. Pain helps, or makes, us pay attention.

So, what about "hurt feelings"? What is it that has been hurt?

Seems to me like it's our sense of self, or ego. So then, why do we have an ego? There's lot of folks saying in effect that ego is a problem. And various psychological and spiritual techniques to help people "let it go".

But that brings me back to the original questions. If "ego" is a hindrance rather than a help to our lives, why do we have it? And if impacts of the world and other people result in "hurt feeling", what are those feelings helping or causing us to protect?

[atisketatasket]

I think you’re using ego in the psychological sense as well as in the popular sense? Ego in the psychological sense is more neutral, in the popular sense it is more negative, suggesting self-absorption at minimum, unbridled arrogance at worst. (Someone correct me if I’m wrong.)

Ego in psychology is one’s self-identity, it includes our conscious processes, so without it where would we be? (Again, feel free to correct.) But having an identity means we can be hurt.

So hurt feelings stem from something that threatens your sense of self? Say you get stood up by a date, you feel unattractive, unimportant, worthless. That’s the ego feeling bruised. I don’t think that means having an ego is negative thing; ideally it would adjust to the slight by recognizing the independent jerkiness of others doesn’t threaten our own senses of self.

[Ididitmyway]

Oh my goodness..As some movie character said, this is "Oprah deep"..:-)

But, jokes aside, the questions you are asking are from such a high spiritual realm that any attempt to start answering them seriously would open the rabbit hole..I do understand the need to ask them though. I ask myself those questions all the time and, as a result, I never stop digging trough all kinds of spiritual teachings and trying to understand the basics of our human existence such as who are we and why we are how we are.

On the question of pain, I don't think pain can be "understood" intellectually. Just like you can't "understand" the flavor of, let's say, a strawberry from its description. I could describe to you in lengths all components and subtleties of the strawberry flavor, but no matter how detailed my description may be you would never "get" it unless you eat a strawberry.

To truly understand what strawberry is you have to eat it. You won't understand it through talking about it. Likewise, to understand what pain is you have to feel it. You can't understand it through your intellect. Intellect is too small to grasp deep and intense sensory-emotional experiences like pain.

Intellectual reasoning and conceptualizing and sensory emotional experiences originate in different parts of the brain that speak different languages. Intellect works in a linear fashion. It operates in the world of form where everything "should" be measurable and where all the dots can and "should" be connected through straight lines.

Emotions, feelings and senses are non-linear. They have their own "logic" that doesn't work in a straightforward way like the linear logic of the intellect.

Therefore, trying to "understand" emotions, feelings and senses through the logic of the intellect is futile. It's like trying to understand, say, the Chinese culture while being attached to the concepts of ethics, morality, beauty, justice, fairness etc of the Western culture or, by using the "logic" of the Western culture and vice verse.

The bottom line, if you want to understand what pain is and why it occurs you need to feel it. There is no other way IMO.

As far as the ego is concerned, as earthly creatures, we need egos, we can't live without them. Ego is simply our sense of our individual identity, a sense of who we are in this world. We cannot belong to earth and not to have some kind of ego. Ego is kind of a mental image of who we think/feel we are. As earthly creatures, we are connected to the physical world of form and our mental image of who we are a.k.a ego is also connected to our physical form, our physical environment, the people and the objects in our life who are also presented in a physical form, to the events that take place in real time and space.

So, ego, in and of itself, is not a problem. It's a necessary part of our life. Our strong attachment to the ego is what creates many problems. By being strongly attached to it or over identified with it, we forget that we are not only earthy but also spiritual creatures. This forgetting creates the illusion of separation when we feel separate from everyone else and also creates a fear of death that gives birth to all other kinds of fear.

[here today]

Originally Posted by atisketatasket

. . .
So hurt feelings stem from something that threatens your sense of self? Say you get stood up by a date, you feel unattractive, unimportant, worthless. That’s the ego feeling bruised. I don’t think that means having an ego is negative thing; ideally it would adjust to the slight by recognizing the independent jerkiness of others doesn’t threaten our own senses of self.

Thanks, ATAT.

Yeah, a "slight" bruises the sense of self and so -- it either adjusts to being worthless in the other's eyes or, as you, said adjusts and doesn't put so much stock in what the other person does or what they may think of us.

But why does it hurt? What causes the pain? Maybe, if people don't think well of us then, as if when we have a sprained ankle, we can't count on our ability to make it in the world the way we had assumed previously (with everything working right and the other person's good will) and so it causes us to pay attention. Until it is "well", until one adjusts.

Only sometimes the sense of self gets really, really damaged, at an early age, when it is still developing. And the pain is constant, unless numbed out. The "numbing out" is the adjustment -- but one that is very limited.

[here today]

Originally Posted by Ididitmyway

. . .
As far as the ego is concerned, as earthly creatures, we need egos, we can't live without them. Ego is simply our sense of our individual identity, a sense of who we are in this world. We cannot belong to earth and not to have some kind of ego. Ego is kind of a mental image of who we think/feel we are. As earthly creatures, we are connected to the physical world of form and our mental image of who we are a.k.a ego is also connected to our physical form, our physical environment, the people and the objects in our life who are also presented in a physical form, to the events that take place in real time and space.

Thanks, very good explanation!

[Amyjay]

I think we humans can over analyze things.
I think emotional pain and physical pain aren't so different from each other and both serve the same purpose - to protect the individual from anything that threatens its survival. At the heart of it pain is simply an uncomfortable perception that urges the organism away from its source.
Its all about survival, man.

Why do we overthink it? Because our ancestors began to eat animal protein and our brains became increasingly complex.
Now we are doomed to ruminate upon the paradox of our own existence for all eternity...

I am, therefore I think.

Originally Posted by Amyjay

I think we humans can over analyze things.
I think emotional pain and physical pain aren't so different from each other and both serve the same purpose - to protect the individual from anything that threatens its survival. At the heart of it pain is simply an uncomfortable perception that urges the organism away from its source.
Its all about survival, man.

Why do we overthink it? Because our ancestors began to eat animal protein and our brains became increasingly complex.
Now we are doomed to ruminate upon the paradox of our own existence for all eternity...

I am, therefore I think.

Okay, this will be a bit off the original topic, but perhaps not so much. This post got me to thinking about the whole pain issue.

You said, "both serve the same purpose - to protect the individual from anything that threatens its survival." Yes, in healthy individuals, that is true. However, the sympathetic nervous system can go haywire and run havoc on a person's physical health. My husband has a neurological disorder that has essentially caused his sympathetic nervous system to be stuck in the "on" position, causing him to feel constant pain, even when there is no stimulus for the pain. Thus, pain is no longer serving to protect him; pain has overtaken his system and subsequently he has a whole string of other health issues that have developed as the result of feeling too much pain too often. Pain is literally creating problems for him rather than serving a natural healthy protection (such as when one might have a healthy response to a hot burner on a stove and quickly withdraw your hand).

I bring this up because I wonder if emotionally/mentally some of us have a similar "stuck" response to perceived "hurt" or pain that has overwhelmed us. Just a thought that sort of makes sense to me. I know, for instance, my PTSD symptoms are "stuck" response (and PTSD has been shown to actually be a nervous system disorder) to perceived stimuli. (I realize I am oversimplifying complex research here.) On a smaller scale, I know my responses to often very trivial matters can be out of proportion to what is actually going on due to my history, my internal perceptions of who I am, etc. So, perhaps, if my response to emotional pain is not serving as a healthy protection for me, but rather it creates more problems for me, then that is an indicator that my emotional health may not be working as it was designed to.

So, "hurt" feelings are very normal and natural. They can be that warning that a relationship is not healthy for us, etc. The trick is when we are "hurt" over things that may be out of proportion, or perhaps when we fear that "hurt" feeling and avoid relationship in order to avoid possible "hurt" in the first place. ???

[Amyjay]

Originally Posted by lolagrace

Okay, this will be a bit off the original topic, but perhaps not so much. This post got me to thinking about the whole pain issue.

You said, "both serve the same purpose - to protect the individual from anything that threatens its survival." Yes, in healthy individuals, that is true. However, the sympathetic nervous system can go haywire and run havoc on a person's physical health. My husband has a neurological disorder that has essentially caused his sympathetic nervous system to be stuck in the "on" position, causing him to feel constant pain, even when there is no stimulus for the pain. Thus, pain is no longer serving to protect him; pain has overtaken his system and subsequently he has a whole string of other health issues that have developed as the result of feeling too much pain too often. Pain is literally creating problems for him rather than serving a natural healthy protection (such as when one might have a healthy response to a hot burner on a stove and quickly withdraw your hand).

I bring this up because I wonder if emotionally/mentally some of us have a similar "stuck" response to perceived "hurt" or pain that has overwhelmed us. Just a thought that sort of makes sense to me. I know, for instance, my PTSD symptoms are "stuck" response (and PTSD has been shown to actually be a nervous system disorder) to perceived stimuli. (I realize I am oversimplifying complex research here.) On a smaller scale, I know my responses to often very trivial matters can be out of proportion to what is actually going on due to my history, my internal perceptions of who I am, etc. So, perhaps, if my response to emotional pain is not serving as a healthy protection for me, but rather it creates more problems for me, then that is an indicator that my emotional health may not be working as it was designed to.

So, "hurt" feelings are very normal and natural. They can be that warning that a relationship is not healthy for us, etc. The trick is when we are "hurt" over things that may be out of proportion, or perhaps when we fear that "hurt" feeling and avoid relationship in order to avoid possible "hurt" in the first place. ???

I agree with everything you wrote. Just this morning I was reading a sample of a book by Janina Fisher (can't remember the title offhand sorry) that said pretty much exactly the same thing. When we experience trauma during the developmental years (or later, with PTSD) our brains interpret non threatening stimuli as threat and respond exactly as if it is - even when it isn't.
Which can be interpreted as being both adaptive AND maladaptive. It is adaptive and purposeful for the young child that is in a recurrently traumatic situation (the early recognition of possible threat enables us to create an early defensive response (fight, flight or freeze) so we can reduce potential harm.
But of course it is not so useful if we are no longer in a threatening situation and keep responding to every little stimulus as though we are.

But why does it hurt? What causes the pain?

Needs...survival as said above. I don't remember who wrote about this concept, but people have a need to see themselves a certain way--the ideal. Which was developed to survive the parents...someone might have had to be 'good' to avoid abandonment and rejection from parents.

So later on, threats to ego surface when something/someone is misaligned with how the self is viewed. ie- he sees himself as a good person, but the T scorned him. In self psychology (I think), the size of the gap between how one sees himself and how seen by another through words or actions corresponds with degree of threat to the ego.

Maybe it hurts because the person relives the feelings of a lifetime of rejection or abandonment?

[Ididitmyway]

Yeah, like I said, it's a rabbit hole once you dig into it. I'd throw in another cause of our pain, as I see it.

How about unfulfilled expectations? crashed hopes? real or perceived injustices?This could be relationship or work related.

You've been dreaming about something turning one way, you've been doing all you could to fulfill your dream and then..bum! everything crashed..A person turns out to be not what you thought they were, you haven't advanced on your career path and the work also became a disappointment, your grown children don't seem to need you anymore and don't seem to care much about you, you've just learned that your close friend has been talking trash about you behind your back..the list is endless. There is no shortage of life scenarios in which we feel victimized, mistreated, deceived, betrayed etc...And they are all pretty much the same for everyone. Different stage, different decorations, different specifics..same themes ..like in a theater.

But, yeah, all that goes back to self-image. When some crap happens to us, it re-enforces the negative image of ourselves and the negative belief that if **** always happens to me this can only be because I deserve it, therefore, I am bad..

[here today]

Yes, these are things that can cause pain. But I'm still wondering about the survival benefit of hurt feelings.

Yes, the pain keeps us away from people who (we perceive) don't value us, and therefore aren't likely to cooperate and collaborate with us. Of course, as children we still need our parents so the pain doesn't really move us away, we frequently develop ways of dealing with the pain instead. Sometimes not such good ways, and sometimes the pain is stuck "on" like lolagrace's husband.

But with a sprained ankle, for instance, the pain keeps me from using it a lot, or makes me pay attention and use it carefully, until it heals itself. Also, I have a chronically weak ankle, so I use a brace to add external strength so I don't "hurt" it. And I recently went to a physical therapist who taught me some exercises so that my ankle has now gotten stronger internally!

I wonder if there might be something like the physical therapy for "hurt feelings". It wouldn't stop or alleviate the pain necessarily but could help prevent re-injury? Maybe that's what psychotherapy has done for some people but it didn't do it much for me.

[ruh roh]

How I think of it is that feelings are like antennae, an extra sense to understand the world around us. The feelings don't get hurt, but they can sense disruptions on a non-physical plane, like a warning system that we interpret as painful to us, driving us away from those experiences or people. They also sense harmonies that we interpret as safe or pleasurable, leading us to more of those experiences or people.

Trauma and dysfunctional family systems messes with our radars--so we might experience something as a warning that's not actually disruptive or vice versa, we experience something as safe that's actually harmful (why we stay in abusive relationships).

Anyway, my crude theory. Basically, though, I don't think we can "think" a way to understanding something that's beyond the thinking realm. So the best I can explain it to myself is that emotional feelings are an extra sense for understanding our environment--internally and externally.

[stopdog]

I think all feelings are useless. I don't see hurt ones as being different from any other sort in terms of usefulness or why they exist. I don't find happy any more intrinsically useful to me than sad or mad etc. More pleasant perhaps, but not more useful.

[here today]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

How I think of it is that feelings are like antennae, an extra sense to understand the world around us. The feelings don't get hurt, but they can sense disruptions on a non-physical plane, like a warning system that we interpret as painful to us, driving us away from those experiences or people. They also sense harmonies that we interpret as safe or pleasurable, leading us to more of those experiences or people.

Trauma and dysfunctional family systems messes with our radars--so we might experience something as a warning that's not actually disruptive or vice versa, we experience something as safe that's actually harmful (why we stay in abusive relationships).

Anyway, my crude theory. . .

Yes, but maybe what gets "hurt" is the ego or sense of self or whatever it is. Stuff happens, generates pain, messes with the antenna, too -- so the antenna can get "damaged", too? Maybe that's what "hurts", too?

Hmm. . .thanks.

Interesting questions and thread! It's a huge, complex topic of course with many layers and I think it can be discussed from hundreds of different angles, hard to come up with one simple, elegant idea that would cover all of it.

I am a neuroscientist and like, for example, Antonio Damasio's work on the function of emotions in decision making - there is a lot of info online and he wrote a few books as well. It is based on how emotional regulation works in the brain and how it interacts with other processes (cognition, perception) and behaviors. I personally like to approach it in this more organic way, looking at how the brain works and regulates behaviors, rather than the (for me) more esoteric, older theories in classical psychology that do not go very far in terms of causality. Emotional regulation and dysfunctions are not so much different from the regulation of other physiological processes, like reactions to physical pain, it's all biochemistry.

As for the function of emotions (both positive and negative), I think it's more complex than just protective. They play integral part in every decision making process, including unconscious ones (which are the majority anyway). Damasio's work has shown, among other things, that individuals who have lesions in critical parts of the brain that processes emotions have serious issues with making accurate assessments and decisions. I also like the "antennae" analogy ruh roh brought up - among many other things, emotional processes are part of how we interact with the external world. They are the inner responses to perceptions - accurate ones and imagined. If they are out of balance, it can lead to distortions in our image of reality (okay, not getting into what "reality" is...) and in our responses, both in feeling and actions.

Early life experiences are especially important in setting up the mechanics of individual emotional regulation because the brain and our whole system is developing until our ~mid-20s, thus more vulnerable. Adverse life experiences in childhood and adolescence can interfere with the balance and functioning of this developing system, and often the effects become very persistent and life-long. (This is actually my research area: how this works biologically, in terms of mechanisms and behavioral outcome.) It is not the momentary (or even longer) feeling of hurt that is most important, that's just part of the reaction. It's how stress, traumas (especially if long-term) affect the brain in a complex way, how ingrained the effects become, and how an individual can cope and function with the whole makeup.

Consciousness, including our sense of self, is another fascinating area... there really is still quite little known about how it works, but it is clear that emotional processes play a role. Only one reason why artificial intelligence needs to integrate some level of emotional-type processes, otherwise it remains very limited and won't be able to interact with the external world very effectively.

All this reminds me of what many therapists claim because it's their work, about the "transforming" effect of increased awareness. I definitely believe that being more aware of our inner world and reactions to the rest of the world can make a big difference in accurately assessing situations - but consciousness can also hinder it. There is a reason why the majority of decision making processes are unconscious by default - it often serves survival and enables us to react quickly to situations where such response is essential. But my biggest criticism about the power of psychotherapy goes back to what I said above. It can affect some of those old, ingrained neurobiological processes that cause problems in functioning, but in most cases nearly not enough, in order to make serious changes. Hence the function of psychotropic medications, but those can only work on what is already there and won't take us back and change our long-term development over many years and decades. They also do not account for individual variation much. Also, awareness on its own is simply just knowing, it is not action.

But going back to the hurt feelings - obviously it's very complex, sometimes the negative reaction can be protective, but they can also create massive fears and avoidance, or even seeking out similar, hurtful and damaging experiences, distortions about ourselves and our interaction with the world. It's far from simple, black-and-white, IMO.

Another way of looking at the "what is hurt" question can be that we feel hurt when our internal motives, needs and desires are not aligned with our experiences and what they provide. In this sense, it is definitely not always protective as we can focus on unfulfilled desires and hurt over them even if satisfying them would not serve us well at all. It can also be excessive. The example that comes to my mind first is what my biggest mental health issue was: addiction. There is a compulsive pleasure-seeking element that focuses on the moment and on "fulfilling" impulses, but the repetitive pattern it creates causes serious damage and hurt on a daily basis, in many ways. Still, the adverse effects do not inhibit the obsession and compulsion.

Another one, from the therapy area, that we can frequently read on this forum, is when the T is not responding when we want, or in the way we want, and how that hurts many people. What is being hurt then? I would not say as big as our sense of self, more a sense of momentary satisfaction. Same in everyday relationship, when things don't happen the way we want or people don't respond the way we wish. One problem, I think, is that often we equate our desires and the arising motives and fears with our sense of self, in the long run. In this context, I think it can be helpful to strip those layers of "ego desires and defenses" - many spiritual practices aim at exactly that. It is still typically painful and hurtful because we need to go against ingrained current, learn to sit with the hurt and let go of it, and develop a form of more unbiased sense of self that is more immune to momentary emotional fluctuations. I personally don't believe that it can ever be 100% efficient due to how human nature works, but is a worthwhile effort for many people. The problem with such spiritual pursuits is that they can hardly be rewarding and successful if some very basic needs remain unmet - like in Maslow's Pyramid.

[stopdog]

Which is why if one could get rid of them all - it would be better - in my opinion. Just take the whole emotion thing out of the loop.

[atisketatasket]

Originally Posted by stopdog

Which is why if one could get rid of them all - it would be better - in my opinion. Just take the whole emotion thing out of the loop.

But if there were no feelings, wouldn’t we lose great art and literature? Opera, say? Even Monty Python?

It seems like an exchange to me, OP. Yes, emotions are painful, we get our feelings hurt, but sometimes there is a return. Not necessarily a lesson, either, but the hurt inspires creation of something beautiful or enjoyable.

[Anne2.0]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

So the best I can explain it to myself is that emotional feelings are an extra sense for understanding our environment--internally and externally.

A very interesting and thoughtful way to put it. I think of feelings, ranging from horny to anger to sadness or fear and everything else, as information that helps me make sense of myself and to a lesser extent, the world around me. They are useful and I try to neither ignore them or be ruled by them. Sort of like how the things that have happened in my life (that I really wish could be surgically excised from my memory) have become more like a page in the book of my life, neither something I have to focus on or avoid.

[here today]

Originally Posted by Xynesthesia

. . .

I am a neuroscientist and like, for example, Antonio Damasio's work on the function of emotions in decision making - there is a lot of info online and he wrote a few books as well. . . I personally like to approach it in this more organic way, looking at how the brain works and regulates behaviors, rather than the (for me) more esoteric, older theories in classical psychology that do not go very far in terms of causality. Emotional regulation and dysfunctions are not so much different from the regulation of other physiological processes, like reactions to physical pain, it's all biochemistry.

As for the function of emotions (both positive and negative), I think it's more complex than just protective. They play integral part in every decision making process, including unconscious ones (which are the majority anyway). . .They are the inner responses to perceptions - accurate ones and imagined. If they are out of balance, it can lead to distortions in our image of reality (okay, not getting into what "reality" is...) and in our responses, both in feeling and actions.

Early life experiences are especially important in setting up the mechanics of individual emotional regulation because the brain and our whole system is developing until our ~mid-20s, thus more vulnerable. Adverse life experiences in childhood and adolescence can interfere with the balance and functioning of this developing system, and often the effects become very persistent and life-long. . .

. . .

All this reminds me of what many therapists claim because it's their work, about the "transforming" effect of increased awareness. . . But my biggest criticism about the power of psychotherapy goes back to what I said above. It can affect some of those old, ingrained neurobiological processes that cause problems in functioning, but in most cases nearly not enough, in order to make serious changes. . .

Thanks, Xynesthesia! Fascinating. And, yes, I would like to approach understanding emotions in a more organic way, too. I might have responded better to a "therapy" that was based on this kind of understanding -- but it wasn't available 50 years ago. And maybe it's still not widely available, as the basic "science" is still in its early stages. Still, . .

Your whole post was great. I picked out some of the parts that struck me the most, rather than quoting the whole thing.

Very much good luck with your work! I know more about -- I'm more aware of -- a lot of aspects of how I function, emotionally and behaviorally, than I did in my mid 20's. And some things have been tweaked and others changed. But overall, that's mostly just what life does to any of us, I think.

It would have been much better for me, I think, if psychologists could have just told me back 50 years ago the ways in which I was limited by my early experience, and helped me "adapt" to what was there, rather than encouraging me to "change" and talking about how much that was possible. If you're partially paralyzed, then you're paralyzed. Lots you can still do to have a good and productive life.

Or maybe science and applied science WILL find ways to help people change those ingrained patterns. But, as I've said often here on PC, it wasn't there for me -- and I chased that illusion with plenty of motivation!!

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by atisketatasket

But if there were no feelings, wouldn’t we lose great art and literature? Opera, say? Even Monty Python?

It seems like an exchange to me, OP. Yes, emotions are painful, we get our feelings hurt, but sometimes there is a return. Not necessarily a lesson, either, but the hurt inspires creation of something beautiful or enjoyable.

The cost might be worth it to me.

[here today]

Originally Posted by stopdog

The cost might be worth it to me.

I can understand that point of view. I numbed out a lot of pesky, bothersome emotions when I was a child. And I was a computer programmer -- some folks might consider both programmers and lawyers kind of robotic. But there can be lots of satisfaction in debate and problem-solving.

Oh, wait -- satisfaction. Isn't that one of those emotion things?

Back to another quote from Xynesthesia:

Consciousness, including our sense of self, is another fascinating area... there really is still quite little known about how it works, but it is clear that emotional processes play a role. Only one reason why artificial intelligence needs to integrate some level of emotional-type processes, otherwise it remains very limited and won't be able to interact with the external world very effectively.

[Anastasia~]

I think that when people on this forum respond to their T not being responsive, that it may start out as a disappointment, but it triggers the abandonment/rejection fears, and thus triggering shame. The shame is an add-on for people with these fears, and shame is involved with the sense of self. Xynesthenia's post was intellegent and helped me figure out a few things, and I do think that with my disorder that it is the shame that brings up the feeling that the rejection is not toward an act one does, but toward who one is. How we change that hurt, and change the perception that it is about who we are, no what we do, remains to be determined.

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by here today

Oh, wait -- satisfaction. Isn't that one of those emotion things?

In my idea of a more perfect world -it would not come up.

I have heard lawyers accused of a lot of things -but not usually that they are robot like. We are often called upon to appeal to and to sway emotion - manipulation and acting just like therapists. Unless you mean in terms of detachment - in which case I would agree that my ability to be detached is very useful in my profession.

I would agree, based on what I know, that lawyers are far from robotic and unemotional. Same for computer programmers, which I am myself in a smaller way and definitely work with people who do it as major profession. Voluntary (even unconscious, over time) emotional detachment strategy is very different from lack of emotions... perhaps even the opposite at times...?

As a scientist and person, I often get compared to Spock in Star Trek. The character is a comical presentation of a personality. But is the person devoid of emotion? I don't think so, not even half-way
Fascinating