Passion as Combustion?

• Passion - How come no-one is talking about it? by Segal, D., PhD, 8/30/97
  
  

I think 'passion' is an emotional qualifier. For starters, it does not exist in an emotional vacuum: it requires an object. Like fire, which needs fuel. One can passionately love, passionately kill, or passionately pursue a hobby. I think it is an expression of the degree of interest in a particular object or process, and predicated upon the involvement of basic emotions. Is it possible that intense passion about something or someone is indicative of a corresponding deficiency?

Note that "dispassionate" often equates with "intellectual', or "emotionally detached". Does that mean that the more cerebrally inclined are incapable of true passion? [I say true because perhaps passion can be faked? - (does an actor give a passionate performance because he is acting, or because he is passionate about acting?)]

Can passion be turned on and off at will, or is it something that is hard-wired in an individual?

Does being 'dispassionate' mean an absence of emotion, or simply better emotional control?

I often wonder, when I see news footage of throbbing throngs of Middle-Eastern people, for example, at political demonstrations, in the throes of passionate hate, directed, say, at America or the West, what it is that makes these people so consumingly involved, almost to the exclusion of all else, in a political issue foisted upon them by the powers that be. Obviously, passion can be inflamed, in both a positive as well as a negative sense, but are certain people, or certain groups, more susceptible to such suggestion? If so, can they be characterized as being distinct in any way, in terms of IQ, gender, or race, etc.? Why, for example, do we attribute more passion to a 'Latin' lover?

How about degree? Is a stalker passionate, or obsessed?

Perhaps, as passionately stated once by Heinz (the Cavern Club, London, 1963): "These are questions, UHHUH, that I can't answer..."

No Replies