". When I oversleep and hence miss something I've been looking forward to there is disappointment but not fear."
Why do you miss it? Why are you disappointed?
Gill, if you are extremely curious and you do enough research you will understand this article a lot more.
Disappointment I'd relate more to sadness, BUT..
The point of describing things in love and fear, is, I think, to point out that we can either move towards things or away from things. Attachment and detachment. Gill, I'd wager that you experience fear as your primary state more often than not; I know I have until becoming aware of it tonight. If you experience more negative emotions than positive in response to, say, a Facebook feed, this indicates a disposition of rejection or avoidance of those items. If you follow fear to its rational end, we can only either avoid something or eliminate something; if neither option suffices, we must choose to love.
On May 10, 2017 Gill wrote :
You say that love and fear are the only two primary emotions and that all other emotions come from them but you give not one iota of evidence. Is this just a wild theory proposed by someone or is there some rational basis for it? It does not tally with my own experience of myself at all. There are many emotions which are neither fear nor love. When I oversleep and hence miss something I've been looking forward to there is disappointment but not fear. Fear needs a focus, something to be afraid of, and there is nothing to be afraid of here. When I go out of my way to get my hands on the puzzle page of the morning newspaper there is enthusiasm and a geeky hunger for puzzle solving but I would not call it love. Then there is a very basic emotion, disgust, which has its own dedicated area of the brain; this makes sense when you consider that disgust is our emotional protection from touching or imbibing poisonous, diseased, or otherwise toxic substances. In neurological terms, disgust is more primary than fear, though introspection doesn't suggest that it is. In fact, psychologists and scientists haven't trusted introspection for accurate observation for over a century because it is a terribly unreliable method. In short, I don't agree with your article at all. It may be reiterating the words of notable spiritual writers and speakers but it is a million miles away from anything which has a rational or empirical basis. It's just wild speculation.