[MUSIC] Welcome again to this third session about the philosophies of, on emotions. And we try to understand the several debates and the methodological, methodological debates that have emerged across the, several debates of 19th century and 20th century about the nature of emotions. You can see here in this, in this milestone. The different debates that have emerged since Harlow described the, the, the meaning of the prefrontal cortex damages that were, were experienced by Phineas Cage at the end of 19th century. That changed his emotional approach and, and even his emo rational processes until Paul Ekman analysis on the, on identification of, of basic emotions, starting from muscular and even close to muscular and evolution processes that explain this basic emotion performances. So we can see that there are several kind of, of researchers that try to understand the relationship between emotions and the brain, because you can remember the previous ideas on the role of the brain into cognitive systems, and the cognitive processes. And even that, that, the belief about about how emotions were considered as, as disruptive forces against the cognitive processes. So when we arrive to the moral debates of, on the nature of emotions, we are always on a very conflictive situation in which we can never know which is first. That egg or that chicken. Or which, what, what is first the physiological input or the cognitive input that processes that physiological input? But anyhow, we can go to the basic authors and state that for example, Charles Darwin understood emotions like innate mechanisms that were useful for survival and social interaction. It was understood with contemporary mythologies by people like Tooby and Cosmides, who make a, a invest on the understanding of these topics from the evolutionary psychology perspective. At the same time we can see other theories like the James-Lange theory about the relationship physiological, physiological and morally inputs that created then emotional states. So we can see first the body interaction and secondly the emotional interaction that tries to add meaning to that body effect. On the other side we can feel, we can see people like Cannon-Bard who tried to, to explain the physiological changes and subjective feelings of an, of emotions as a response to a stimulus. And, and both things were separated and independent. So arousal could not really occur before the, the emotion. We can see also the, the theories of Schachter and, and Singer who talked about the two factor theory that embraces the notions of phys, physiological arousal and cognitive labels. Or we can find, also find the appraisal theory of Lazarus, or the notion of Ekman of, of, of, of basic hardwired and culturally universal emotions that he says at can be numbered, as six basic emotions. But anyhow, we can see that inside the mammalian brain, we are processing emotional input in a very interactive process. Previously to, to this moment, and at the beginning of the various first brain theories about the raw emotions, we thought that some body inputs were processed emotionally. And then, some of them arrived to the, to the high levels of, of the, of the brain. And, and, and that high cognitive level tried to, to found solutions to those inputs. But the truth is that there is never so hierarchical process that, there, that that, centers of emotional, or more emotional processes that can be found at, at the amygdala. At the same time they are always working with several areas of the, of the brain in a very parallel process, sequential but parallel process in which decisions and, and information processes are produced. So our brains are not first pro, processing basic physiological information then giving emotional meaning to that information and finally making cognitive processes on, on that information. But, at the same time, all these processes can be made in parallel and with continuous emotional tagging of all this information. So between an, an, a sensory capture of information and at the end of the final behavior, in the middle, we can find a continuous brain emotional processing of all the information and, and an emotional driving of all the cognitive process. So there is nothing like pure cognitive rational process, processing of the information. But all several layers that we could design the model the of, of how we process information at all the different layers we can find emotional mechanisms that we use in order to produce final actions and final understanding. Even of, of, that information. So we are, when we talk about emotions and cognition we are in front of a, of a chicken or the egg dilemma. But this can be really diluted when we think on the unities of body and mind. Because for contemporary cognitive experts can be stated that there is nothing like a mind here and a body there. We are a same, and architecture, body and architecture that it's working, following deeply sensory model processes. And emotions have a very specific role into the managing, managing of this information. So most theories also suggest that really a complex brain interaction between ancient emotional levels of the brain following a multi and tripartite vision of, of the brain and modern high-cognitive areas. So emotions are not just working on low level informational processing mechanisms, but they are working at all the levels of cognitive processes. And finally emocognitive processes must be under, understood as, as truly, deeply, hard-wired, hard-wired and, and embodied into into our physical structures. They are nothing that can be just put on for specific moments. We are always emocognitive cognitive systems. So, thank you so much for being here. And I hope to see you into the next section. Bye.