I imagine this was discussed a number of times in the past, but do not see any recent threads/topics specifically talking about this.
Now, for as long as I have been watching ST:TNG I always believed and accepted that Data never had emotions. Everything was a calculation, an equation processed that determined his responses and reasoning..... he eventually got an emotion chip that seemed to give him real emotions, thus it should be safe to say he never had them.
But over the years and especially just recently when my wife and I have been going through the series from start to finish, I've started to notice more and more hints/clues pointing towards him either always having emotions, or understanding enough about emotions to simulate emotional responses. (Even though he claimed he didn't, either on purpose or out of ignorance)
In the past, I even told people who suggested he had emotions that I felt they were incorrect and looking too far into things.... but now, I am not so sure.
Afterall, what are emotions?
Most definitions seem to revolve around emotions being an unconscious reaction based on feelings to an event or situation that is otherwise not manually conceived of in the mind..... but they're stuck still using "Feelings" to explain "Emotions" which are the same thing.
One first has to look at the reasons why we feel the way we do towards something.
I feel a certain way towards someone or something based on past experiences, lessons and knowledge I have gathered over a period of time. I've grown to learn when something benefits my life or others lives, I've grown to learn when something is not beneficial, I've grown to become accustomed to certain things in my life, and I've grown to learn what may or may not damage/harm myself or others, either mentally or physically..... my emotions are derived from my past experiences in life which are directly connected to the needs of my life.
When you watch something on your evening news report that makes you angry, someone may ask you why this report makes you angry..... you then in turn explain the reasons that justify your reasoning or emotional response to that report. Maybe it's against the law, maybe someone was injured when there was no need, maybe the report explains a situation that is generally unfair to one group or another.....
Now look at examples from Data. When he makes a decision or takes an action, sometimes Picard or someone else would ask him why he did what he did, because what he did may be seen as an emotional response, but Data in turn, believing he doesn't have emotions or simply doesn't understand them, replies with a generic reasoning response for why he did something and he chalks it up to being either the logical thing to do, or simply the right thing to do, based on whatever reasons he just explained.
But besides the differences of facial expressions or lack there of, what's the difference between how we come to our own conclusions and reactions to a situation and how he came to his own conclusions and reactions?
Sure our emotions may come to us instantly and without really thinking of why (they just do) but if one really thought about it, they will see very clearly their own logical reasoning at work in the background of the mind that eventually created the emotional response they experienced.
As a few examples of Data's possible emotional existence, how he reacted to Tasha's death, how he's still at times preoccupied because of it, how he quickly allowed her sister, Ishara, to be accepted into his life and allowed her to manipulate his previous connection/feelings towards Tasha...... How he almost killed Fajo and didn't quite come forward with explaining what happened to Riker...... his desire to protect his creation, Lal from Starfleet.
Now yes, most of those and more examples can be explained away as deductive reasoning or plain simple logical conclusions computed in a manner that seems to justify an action or position..... but most of the things we get emotional over are usually based around our own understanding of a situation based on what we know or believe is right or wrong and to us, we believe our emotional responses are justified because to us, it makes sense to do so.
You look at a new born baby and she/he makes a funny face or sound..... you laugh or smile, because to you, new born babies are cute, innocent, we have it hardwired into our genetics to care and desire protection of new borns.... heck there could be all kinds of reasons/justifications.... but even though you may not think of those reasons/justifications, that doesn't mean they don't exist or are not at play when you react emotionally.
Also, have you ever been in a gathering of people you never wanted to be in? You may have noticed that you are not comfortable in the environment, the people you are surrounded by, their humor, but while you may hate the situation, you will simulate smiles and cheer, you will simulate small talk and act like you're actually interested in being there..... why?
In most cases, it makes sense to put up with this for a short period of time and keep the peace rather then ruin everybody else's time... you weighed the pros and cons and felt sacrificing your own comfort was better then expanding that discomfort to everybody, which could logically expand on your already existing discomfort and thus put you in an even worse situation then you presently are in.
Now I'm not going to claim Data had emotions exactly like you and I do, but I'm now in the position to claim that he had some level of emotions, even if very limited. The emotion chip only allowed him to apply physical responses to the logic at play in the back of his mind in such a way that he could now perhaps understand the portion of emotions he wasn't exactly grasping.
What are your thoughts?
Did Data always have some level of emotions, even remote.... or was it all just plain & basic computer calculations and reasoning with nothing more beyond that?
If it's all just computer calculated reasoning.... then again, what's the difference between that and how we think?
As I see it, our emotions are based on a very complex and very detailed web of logic and reasoning on top of more logic and reasoning, which is on top of more and more logic and reasoning.....
If a computer or small child asked you why you did something and you explained why, the computer or child would ask why again in regards to another aspect of your explanation.... you explain, they ask why.....
Why?
Why?
Why?
It's redundant and can get on your nerves after a while.... but no matter how far down the "Why" road you go, you'll come across a reason/further explanation, that falls into another and then another..... because of this very complex web of reasoning and logic we built our lives around over the years, we grew to develop our understanding of this complex web through using emotions to over simplify our reasoning.
IMO, Data does the exact same thing, but approaches it in just a slightly different manner and expresses himself accordingly to this different approach.
Now, for as long as I have been watching ST:TNG I always believed and accepted that Data never had emotions. Everything was a calculation, an equation processed that determined his responses and reasoning..... he eventually got an emotion chip that seemed to give him real emotions, thus it should be safe to say he never had them.
But over the years and especially just recently when my wife and I have been going through the series from start to finish, I've started to notice more and more hints/clues pointing towards him either always having emotions, or understanding enough about emotions to simulate emotional responses. (Even though he claimed he didn't, either on purpose or out of ignorance)
In the past, I even told people who suggested he had emotions that I felt they were incorrect and looking too far into things.... but now, I am not so sure.
Afterall, what are emotions?
Most definitions seem to revolve around emotions being an unconscious reaction based on feelings to an event or situation that is otherwise not manually conceived of in the mind..... but they're stuck still using "Feelings" to explain "Emotions" which are the same thing.
One first has to look at the reasons why we feel the way we do towards something.
I feel a certain way towards someone or something based on past experiences, lessons and knowledge I have gathered over a period of time. I've grown to learn when something benefits my life or others lives, I've grown to learn when something is not beneficial, I've grown to become accustomed to certain things in my life, and I've grown to learn what may or may not damage/harm myself or others, either mentally or physically..... my emotions are derived from my past experiences in life which are directly connected to the needs of my life.
When you watch something on your evening news report that makes you angry, someone may ask you why this report makes you angry..... you then in turn explain the reasons that justify your reasoning or emotional response to that report. Maybe it's against the law, maybe someone was injured when there was no need, maybe the report explains a situation that is generally unfair to one group or another.....
Now look at examples from Data. When he makes a decision or takes an action, sometimes Picard or someone else would ask him why he did what he did, because what he did may be seen as an emotional response, but Data in turn, believing he doesn't have emotions or simply doesn't understand them, replies with a generic reasoning response for why he did something and he chalks it up to being either the logical thing to do, or simply the right thing to do, based on whatever reasons he just explained.
But besides the differences of facial expressions or lack there of, what's the difference between how we come to our own conclusions and reactions to a situation and how he came to his own conclusions and reactions?
Sure our emotions may come to us instantly and without really thinking of why (they just do) but if one really thought about it, they will see very clearly their own logical reasoning at work in the background of the mind that eventually created the emotional response they experienced.
As a few examples of Data's possible emotional existence, how he reacted to Tasha's death, how he's still at times preoccupied because of it, how he quickly allowed her sister, Ishara, to be accepted into his life and allowed her to manipulate his previous connection/feelings towards Tasha...... How he almost killed Fajo and didn't quite come forward with explaining what happened to Riker...... his desire to protect his creation, Lal from Starfleet.
Now yes, most of those and more examples can be explained away as deductive reasoning or plain simple logical conclusions computed in a manner that seems to justify an action or position..... but most of the things we get emotional over are usually based around our own understanding of a situation based on what we know or believe is right or wrong and to us, we believe our emotional responses are justified because to us, it makes sense to do so.
You look at a new born baby and she/he makes a funny face or sound..... you laugh or smile, because to you, new born babies are cute, innocent, we have it hardwired into our genetics to care and desire protection of new borns.... heck there could be all kinds of reasons/justifications.... but even though you may not think of those reasons/justifications, that doesn't mean they don't exist or are not at play when you react emotionally.
Also, have you ever been in a gathering of people you never wanted to be in? You may have noticed that you are not comfortable in the environment, the people you are surrounded by, their humor, but while you may hate the situation, you will simulate smiles and cheer, you will simulate small talk and act like you're actually interested in being there..... why?
In most cases, it makes sense to put up with this for a short period of time and keep the peace rather then ruin everybody else's time... you weighed the pros and cons and felt sacrificing your own comfort was better then expanding that discomfort to everybody, which could logically expand on your already existing discomfort and thus put you in an even worse situation then you presently are in.
Now I'm not going to claim Data had emotions exactly like you and I do, but I'm now in the position to claim that he had some level of emotions, even if very limited. The emotion chip only allowed him to apply physical responses to the logic at play in the back of his mind in such a way that he could now perhaps understand the portion of emotions he wasn't exactly grasping.
What are your thoughts?
Did Data always have some level of emotions, even remote.... or was it all just plain & basic computer calculations and reasoning with nothing more beyond that?
If it's all just computer calculated reasoning.... then again, what's the difference between that and how we think?
As I see it, our emotions are based on a very complex and very detailed web of logic and reasoning on top of more logic and reasoning, which is on top of more and more logic and reasoning.....
If a computer or small child asked you why you did something and you explained why, the computer or child would ask why again in regards to another aspect of your explanation.... you explain, they ask why.....
Why?
Why?
Why?
It's redundant and can get on your nerves after a while.... but no matter how far down the "Why" road you go, you'll come across a reason/further explanation, that falls into another and then another..... because of this very complex web of reasoning and logic we built our lives around over the years, we grew to develop our understanding of this complex web through using emotions to over simplify our reasoning.
IMO, Data does the exact same thing, but approaches it in just a slightly different manner and expresses himself accordingly to this different approach.
Last edited: