Ah, Mr Spock versus Dr. McCoy.
You know, why pit the two against each other, as if being objective meant having no emotions, and being emotional meant having no objectivity?
Our emotions can also help us take a ‘cold hard fact’ and apply it to living breathing things and make that ‘cold hard fact’ something that we sit up and notice in a positive way, whereas we might have simply let it go and not even have it register on the old radar.
I’m reminded of Jane Austen’s Persuasion. The heroine, Anne, is pondering the behavior of a cousin who had once ‘written them off’ in early adulthood and who now is seeking to ‘re-enter the fold’. She notices that this man’s very good manners are appreciated, not just by the rational and intelligent members of the family and servants, but also by the ‘emotional’, the silly, the scoundrelly as well. He even gets along well with the ones whom one would think would either dislike him or whom he would dislike, such as the fortune hunter who is pursuing the man he is heir to. And, to paraphrase, Anne thinks, "How much more she would trust the person who sometimes did a hasty action or made an error, rather than a cold, cautious, calculating and ‘all pleasing’ man. That she prized those who were frank, even if that frankness ‘cost’ them, rather than those who ‘kept hold of everything’ by a persona that ‘changed to suit’ each person, such that he would act one way for one person, and completely opposite to suit another.
The seemingly objective person might look as though he is assessing things and acting without prejudice or ‘emotionalism’ but instead of the reason being for the good of others, it could be for his good only. Whereas the seemingly ‘emotional’ person could have not just an objective and informed rational view, but through having that view understand its importance and have strong feelings about showing that importance to others.
