<p>Attempting to reduce emotional responses to mathematics is likely in the realm of chaos theory.</p>
<p>Here is a great Robert Sapolsky Stanford lecture on Chaos versus Reductionism.</p>
<p><a href="https://youtu.be/_njf8jwEGRo" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://youtu.be/_njf8jwEGRo</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-23T23:25:33.863Z
2020-08-23T23:25:33.863Z
Keith Knauber
<p>Chip Conley's ideas as to emotional equations represent an interesting concept; however, the equations do not appear to be founded in science at this stage.  To represent the equations mathematically would first require to ability to measure each of component of the equations.  Measuring psychological concepts is fraught with issues at this stage and a great deal theoretical research is ongoing (see references below).</p>
<p>Notwithstanding the methodological issues, the equations are certainly thought provoking:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Emotions = Life</p>
</li>
<li><p>Emotion = Energy + Motion</p>
</li>
<li><p>Event + Reaction = Outcome</p>
</li>
<li><p>Despair = Suffering – Meaning</p>
</li>
<li><p>Disappointment = Expectations – Reality</p>
</li>
<li><p>Regret = Disappointment + Responsibility</p>
</li>
<li><p>Jealousy = Mistrust / Self-Esteem</p>
</li>
<li><p>Joy = Love – Fear</p>
</li>
<li><p>etc.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p>Adroher, N. D., Prodinger, B., Fellinghauer, C. S., &amp; Tennant, A. (2018). All metrics are equal, but some metrics are more equal than others: A systematic search and review on the use of the term “metric.” PloS One, 13(3), e0193861. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193861" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193861</a></p>
<p>Boag, S. (2015). Personality assessment, “construct validity”, and the significance of theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 84, 36–44. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.039" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.039</a></p>
<p>Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., &amp; van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110(2), 203–219. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203</a></p>
<p>Nowland, T., Beath, A., &amp; Boag, S. (2019). Objectivity, realism, and psychometrics. Measurement, 145, 292–299. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.05.038" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.05.038</a></p>
<p>Conley, C. (2012). Emotional equations: Simple truths for creating happiness+ success. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 1451607261</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-17T13:12:35.323Z
2020-08-17T13:12:35.323Z
Tony Mobbs
<p>Disclaimer- I had asked this question in the Math stack exchange, but was encouraged to ask it here.</p>
<p>I'm working on creating an emotional calculator of sorts, for personal use, wherein, whenever I am stressed, I can pretty much figure out what to do to feel better.</p>
<p>I'll be using the Emotional Equations book by Chip Conley (summary here: <a href="https://blas.com/emotional-equations/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://blas.com/emotional-equations/</a>) as a point of reference.</p>
<p>here's my question:</p>
<p>Let's take the following equation as an example:</p>
<p><strong>Let's say I interviewed for a job and now am anxious about whether or not I will get it.</strong></p>
<p><em>Anxiety = Uncertainty <span class="math-container">$\times$</span> Powerlessness</em></p>
<p>To make myself feel better, if I focus on the Powerlessness variable, then I can do many things to make myself feel better. For example: I could apply for more jobs, go take a walk, go for a run, etc.</p>
<p>However, each of those things will not help me in the same way. They will each have different &quot;proportions of powerlessness&quot; to offer, so to speak. So, if I go get ice cream, sure I'll feel a little better, but I'm sure I'll be anxious an hour after eating that ice cream. So, on a scale of 1-10, it will probably reduce powerlessness by 0.5 or 1, whereas if I apply for more jobs, for example, it will reduce powerlessness by 7-8.</p>
<p><strong>What math principle/logic/practice can I use to calculate how much something (eating ice cream) can affect powerlessness?</strong></p>
<p>Thank you! Apologies for the long question.</p>

<emotion><measurement><stress><anxiety>
Emotional Calculator; How can I mathematically show a decrease in anxiety using an emotional equation?
Senec25
# Emotional Calculator; How can I mathematically show a decrease in anxiety using an emotional equation?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-08-17)

Disclaimer- I had asked this question in the Math stack exchange, but was encouraged to ask it here.

I'm working on creating an emotional calculator of sorts, for personal use, wherein, whenever I am stressed, I can pretty much figure out what to do to feel better.

I'll be using the Emotional Equations book by Chip Conley (summary here: <https://blas.com/emotional-equations/>) as a point of reference.

here's my question:

Let's take the following equation as an example:

**Let's say I interviewed for a job and now am anxious about whether or not I will get it.**

*Anxiety = Uncertainty $\times$ Powerlessness*

To make myself feel better, if I focus on the Powerlessness variable, then I can do many things to make myself feel better. For example: I could apply for more jobs, go take a walk, go for a run, etc.

However, each of those things will not help me in the same way. They will each have different "proportions of powerlessness" to offer, so to speak. So, if I go get ice cream, sure I'll feel a little better, but I'm sure I'll be anxious an hour after eating that ice cream. So, on a scale of 1-10, it will probably reduce powerlessness by 0.5 or 1, whereas if I apply for more jobs, for example, it will reduce powerlessness by 7-8.

**What math principle/logic/practice can I use to calculate how much something (eating ice cream) can affect powerlessness?**

Thank you! Apologies for the long question.

**Tags:** emotion, measurement, stress, anxiety


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-08-23. Score: 3

Attempting to reduce emotional responses to mathematics is likely in the realm of chaos theory.

Here is a great Robert Sapolsky Stanford lecture on Chaos versus Reductionism.

<https://youtu.be/_njf8jwEGRo>


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-08-17. Score: 2

Chip Conley's ideas as to emotional equations represent an interesting concept; however, the equations do not appear to be founded in science at this stage. To represent the equations mathematically would first require to ability to measure each of component of the equations. Measuring psychological concepts is fraught with issues at this stage and a great deal theoretical research is ongoing (see references below).

Notwithstanding the methodological issues, the equations are certainly thought provoking:

* Emotions = Life
* Emotion = Energy + Motion
* Event + Reaction = Outcome
* Despair = Suffering – Meaning
* Disappointment = Expectations – Reality
* Regret = Disappointment + Responsibility
* Jealousy = Mistrust / Self-Esteem
* Joy = Love – Fear
* etc.

**References**

Adroher, N. D., Prodinger, B., Fellinghauer, C. S., & Tennant, A. (2018). All metrics are equal, but some metrics are more equal than others: A systematic search and review on the use of the term “metric.” PloS One, 13(3), e0193861. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193861>

Boag, S. (2015). Personality assessment, “construct validity”, and the significance of theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 84, 36–44. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.039>

Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110(2), 203–219. <https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203>

Nowland, T., Beath, A., & Boag, S. (2019). Objectivity, realism, and psychometrics. Measurement, 145, 292–299. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.05.038>

Conley, C. (2012). Emotional equations: Simple truths for creating happiness+ success. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 1451607261


---

