Goleman's "theory" of mind

Two Brains Equals Two Minds Because Goleman's "theory" of mind is based strictly on his interpretations of data from brain research, he comes to some questionable conclusions about the mind. If there is a good reason to think of the human mind having "two brains" or "two minds," then it is to delineate the difference between our egocentric drives (with accompanying egocentric thoughts and emotions) and our rational drives (with accompanying rational thoughts and emotions). Goleman says that the emotional mind is quicker than the rational, or thinking mind, springing into action without pausing even a moment to consider what it is doing.

Equating the "Thinking Mind" with the "Rational Mind" Because of Goleman's initial distinction between the "Thinking Mind" and the "Emotional Mind," he is led into a number of problems, as I have suggested. A more realistic theory of mind would thus delineate not the "emotional mind" from the "rational mind," but the "rational mind" (with its related emotional component) and the "irrational mind" (with its related emotional component). On the other hand, Goleman states, "Our emotions have a mind of their own, one which can hold views quite independently of our rational mind ."

This statement seems to mean that emotions can somehow think for themselves, rather than that the emotional mind uses the thinking mind (which, remember Goleman equates with the "rational mind") to serve its purposes. ," we are unclear as to whether, in Goleman's view, the emotional mind thinks for itself, or whether it uses the thinking mind to think for it. It seems to me that Goleman's concept of "emotional hijacking" implies that when we experience highly intense emotions, those emotions drive our thinking (or lead us to action prior to thinking). Most importantly, we must come to terms with those truths about the human mind that enable us to begin the process of taking charge of our minds: that thoughts and emotions are inextricably bound, that we have both egocentric and rational tendencies, that our inner conflicts are never best understood as a simple matter between emotion and reason, that self-command of mind takes both extended education and self-discipline, that our fullest rational development is dependent on the development of rational affect, that to bring intelligence to bear upon emotions we must take charge of the thinking underlying those emotions.