To a large extent emotions ultimately reveal inherent truths about people or societies. From the excerpt, the western world's 'remorse' and 'guilt' may show a truth on the Western view of the world; the narcissistic view. It sheds more light on the western use of remorse to wield power, since as global beneficiaries, the power accrued during colonialism resurfaces as some form of 'neo-colonialism.' Our evidence- Aid given in Africa.

However, one must ask how valid this generalisation is. How valid is our reasoning since it is mainly inductive? What if the Western World's show of emotion is just a facade? When does the evidence of emotion prove true enough??

On the flip side of the coin,the Western World is probably sincerely remorseful and guilty for the harm they have done in the past. Maybe...just maybe they have drowned their 'power thirst' or 'superiority complex' as Bruckner puts it and are ready to make ammends.Maybe, they are actually wielding power. How do we tell the true intentions behind these emotions to obtain the truth about them?

Our uncertainty of whether or not their emotions are true makes our judgement of the truths about their society invalid to a large extent. In effect, there is no well defined truth about their society because there is no accurate means to decipher the intentions behind these emotions. Rebutting my first statement-Emotions then do not ultimately reveal inherent truths about people.

I do believe that to some extent, the emotions of a people may reveal certain truths about them. In this particular example however, I must agree with Efua when she says that the truths referred to in the excerpt are generalisations. The truth may exist but I do not believe they were arrived at as a result of displayed emotions only.

Emotions may help in the uncovering truths, but only when utilised with other tools. Maybe we can look at the gravity of the errors that they calim to be remorsful of, or the subsequent errors they may have committed other nations to determine the true nature of their emotions and possibily some inherent truths about them.

It is evident that on one hand, emotions may reveal the inherent truths of people. As Pascal Bruckner’s puts it in his article, “ideas and debates have been informed by a sense of guilt that, despite its secular guise …” The Europeans may be sincerely remorseful because they are the same people who created “abolition” and hence if they were not worried about the conditions of slavery, they would have considered their actions as something positive and the world would still have been in the era of slavery. From the actions of the Europeans (their abolition process), for the inherent truth to be accepted, emotions need to be backed up by actions.

Moreover, considering Efua’s thoughts (questions) on the “Europe guilt being a façade or if the evidence of emotions prove true?” , I must agree with Yaw that maybe emotions may not be the best option to reveal the inherent truth.

What if language backed by emotions may confirm the truth? Are emotions then really the best form of judgment or conclusion about the truth?

Marilyn, a deep consideration of the abolition of the slave trade proves that to a large extent, the Weserners abolished it for MAINLY THEIR BENEFIT and not because of the humanitarian aspect(even though indeed that was also a factor).(Remember The Adam Smithian theory, the British policy of neo-mercantilism and the West's quest for a wider market?-all for their gain).

Moreover, Marilyn, the Western World is already using language to express their emotions.When the neo-colonialist negotiates with our leaders he uses language. When Obama is expressing his desire to help Africa, he uses language(not to say Obama is not genuine). Language, in my opinion is not a concrete criterion to determine the authenticity of emotion. What we say or express may not be a true reflection of what really is deep within.

Yaw, even the gravity of the errors they have committed as you mentioned cannot be used to show the genuinity of their emotions. Remember that the neo-colonialist is narcissist!
Yaw, which other factors can be added to emotions to establish a solid judgement?

Efua, i do agree with you on the fact that the Westerners abolished slavery mainly for their benefit....."this self-recrimination amounts to little more than delusional narcissism, a means of sustaining a sense of our own importance not through the exercise of power but through the expression of remorse"..... it is still evident in present days, they give us the loans and come for the more profitable natural resources like the gold and oil, is this really an expression of remorse?

Now Marilyn, addressing your issue about truth, language backed by emotion can NEVER confirm the truth. if that was the case, then the judges will just just have to decide on who has presented their case convincingly and not make use of other forms of technology like finger prints to CONFIRM "the truth" they hear from the people in court. But even with truth, it's a very delicate issue,what really is the truth?

I agree fully with Efua. Language is sometimes used as a veil to hide what a person truly feels within.Language is by no means an access or opening into a person's emotions. I think that many people are deceived into thinking certain people are who they are just because of their language, which is simply used in cajoling. Indeed many Western countries seem to be so concerned about the plight of African countries and offer huge loans all in the aim of improving the statuses of these countries. Most certainly, we do not know if their intentions are true, but simply believe in their words.

I think there is no measure to test the validity of emotions. Trusting someone's emotions is only the BELIEF that what he or she feels within is genuine, however this does not point out any REALITY of what actually is felt within the person.

Kweku, I must disagree, I do believe that there is a way to know the validity of emotions. Just look at it in everyday life: If a friend walks up to you crying you can tell that the person is genuinely sad. To answer Efua's question, the factors that can be used to establish emotion are many and combined in various ways. they may be too complex for us to enumerate. we would have to consider matters like trust, our sense of judgement, the collective opinion of the judges of emotions and a host of others.

On a small scale, like the example i put above, these factors may be very few, say just based on the way you trust a person. However, the complexity is introduced when we try to use emotion to reveal inherent truths about a whole societies.

Feel free to add any more factors that you think might aid in this discovery process.

Yaw i cannot agree with what you are saying about knowing people's real emotions. Efua has already pointed that out. I may have been smiling at you and laughing with you and all that but what makes you think that those actions are genuine and I'm not just tolerating you because I want something from you? (This is just a scenario). Isn't this the same thing that the Western world is doing? Aren't they just tolerating us because they need us to enhance their neocolonialist ideals? I think we should look at the bigger picture here. The fact that you are genuine in the expression of your emotion does not follow for everyone else.

Generally, human beings have compromised in trying to know what people truly feel. We tend to believe the emotions of the people we trust and are normally skeptical of the emotions of those we don't. Although this technique may not always be accurate, this is our only way of "knowing" what people are really feeling. I think our instincts can be our only judge in this matter.

Crystal, i fully agree with you. Yaw, consider this.

- Some people cry when they are happy. Others cry when they are sad. Most of the time we associate tears with sadness. The fact that you have seen someone crying does not mean the person is sad (tears of joy!).

Haven't you ever been so down and said "oh I'm fine" when someone asked you how you were?

Until scientists are able to invent an appropriate detector...(hmm..let's wait and see how that goes), we will not be able to strongly use emotions for judgement!

Efua, I know it almost always looks like you cannot use emotions to determine truth; you almost always can't. But in some cases, Emotions can be used to determine inherent truths. I'm saying this because some people express genuine emotion. I just want us to acknowledge the existence of this possibility and not just debunk the idea that emotions can be used.

Yaw, I do not think I agree with you!!! How do you ever know their emotions are genuiune? Also Efua though you are making some interesting comments, Do you really think that scientist have to come up an appropriate detector in order that we are able to use emotions for judgemnet? Think about this: once we think that nothing is working we fall on the scientist's great invention. I am not saying this is a bad idea or approach because as we can see in our world today, science is a a great contributor to many different aspects of our environment.

I agree with kweku. Yes emotions to some extent can be use to reveal the truth but not some situations. I can use language to express an emotion that shows that am really happy that this or this has happened to you, but if u sit down and think about it, you will find that the person is trying to say the opposite of happiness. As kweku said we shouldn’t be deceived with emotions some of them do not reveal the truth behind them. The western people can claim that they are happy with the development of some African countries by putting some emotions on their faces when giving the speech but it doesn’t reveal any truth that they are really happy. Maybe they are trying to hide the sadness they feel by giving us loans without benefiting from Africans in other areas. As we know whenever they give us loans we always pay for them in many ways, it is not always a form of aid without them benefiting. Therefore I think that people should not fully agree that emotions can be used to reveal inherited truths.

I think that Yaw's response has been dismembered by Crystal, Efua and Marilyn have misinterpreted the reliability of emotion as a way of knowing. There is an obvious distinction between the emotion that a person feels and the emotion that the person expresses and conveys (facial expressions and other visual/audio communicative mechanisms). At the end of the day, the actual emotion felt by the person whether accurately/honestly expressed or not allows that individual, if nobody else, to know how they feel about whatever stimulated the particular emotion. Secondly, and quite equally as importantly. There are techniques and technologies that allow to go beyond what is presented to us as an emotion. For instance, lie detectors, record the pulse of the individual in question in order to quantify a physical response (pulse) to a primitive and primary emotion, fear. Even if the person has on a "poker face" (oooh lady gaga), The test allows us to know what another person feels, even when they are trying to hide it.

Albert...I totally disagree with you. The reliability of these 'techniques' and 'technologies' is highly questionable. Please how sure are you that it is not another factor that is causing the rate of the pulse of the individual to be as it is? How sure? or is it just an illusion??

Besides, We haven't misinterpreted the reliability of emotion as a way of knowing. We are hust saying that even though emotion is a way of knowing, there are a lot of 'buts' attached to it. With reference to Mr. Kitching's thread "The Tyranny of Guilt, suggests that the Western world’s expression of guilt in certain instances allow us to infer certain truths about them.'

Albert, how do we use technology or techniques to find out if the Western World is just acting or is being real? and Albert, how many People from the Western World are you going to use in your investigation?

See, i'm not saying leaning on emotions is not effective but i hope you get my point(from the questions posed)?

I have to agree with Efua on this one. So many people have been able to cheat their way pout of lie detectors.Indeed other factors may be causing the rate of the pulse of the person to be that way.

Indeed Albert, I think that emotion is not just a sure and exact way of knowing the truth.

For what Yaw posted on Feb 1, about how easy it is for us to tell that a friend is sad just because he or she is shedding tars is not a valid argument because people in different parts of the world tend to show different actions all in the expression of one particular emotion.

For example, in some parts of Ghana and Africa, putting your hands on your head means that you are bereaved and are sad. However in other parts of the world, say for example the U.S.A, it would mean something else. It is therefore very unreliable to judge based on certain actions which are commonly linked to the expression of emotions.

I agree with what Kweku is sayin. Emotion is very strong and people from different places tend to express emotion in different ways. So Yaw supposing when i get extremely happy, I shed tears will u automatically assume I am sad. This may not always be the case because I know people who "shed tears of joy" when they are extremely happy.

Efua has a point when she says emotions is just not a sure way of knowing the truth.In some cases it may be but it is definately not an efect way because some people can definately use emotions to deceive people.

Ever heard of "crocidile tears"?