The complexity of emotions perplexes me. They seem to define our every move in life as if it were a chess game. You sacrifice a pawn to protect the King in a Chess game. How different do you think real life is, or isn't? Would you sacrifice a life to save another based on the value of the life? But then again who decides that a life is more valuable than another? In a game of chess, given the choice to lose a pawn or a rook for example, it would be logical to let go of the pawn. Within the pawn, however lied the potential to be Queen one day, however slim the chances. Do emotions vary logic itself, or do emotions just make us ignore logic. Or is it that the state of logic itself is not constant and adding a certain reagent to the reaction changes the state of logic itself?
I have always stated that all emotions are pivotal to our survival including the negative ones. You wouldn’t be able to realise that you need to take your hand of the fire if there wasn't any pain. If you have watched superhero movies you would bear witness that many of them have sad and tragic backgrounds. And the villains, they do too. When you are sad, angry or perhaps full of regret you come up with ideas, ideas of avoiding similar situations. One would even state that these negative emotions are the driving force behind humanity. If you are dissatisfied you try to work towards a state in which you are satisfied. However, if you are happy you will try to maintain the state of things by doing. well, nothing. Because of the fear that adding a reagent to this reaction will lead to unknown outcomes. Humans have been and will always be afraid of the unknown. The mysteries of the universe such as death scare us to, well, death.