-----Mensagem original-----
De: Paul H.Dillon <illonph@pacbell.net>
Para: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Data: Domingo, 18 de Fevereiro de 2001 18:55
Assunto: Re: Bakhtin, moral answerability...
(...) I just got a message from Carl in which he explained it as:
"I did mention the distinction between emotions and feelings in my article
"A Cultural Psych. Analysis of Emotions" in Culture & Psych. It's on my web
page. You must have forgotten this point since I know that you've read every
of my articles! My point was that a feeling is a visceral process whereas an
emotion can be more intellectual. "I love Chicago blues" is an emotion but I
don't always FEEL that love (only when I get my Butterfield CD from PD will
I actually FEEL it). I don't know if the distinction is clear or valid but
wanted to contrast the actual feeling state from the whole
conceptual-psychological structure of an emotion. It seemed to me that we
can have an emotion that we don't necessarily feel strongly at the moment."
(...)
I did not know this article and Ratner's assuptions.
(...) very different than the distinction I understood Ricardo to be
making with respect to the words "feeling" and "emotion" -- He's placing the
"intellectual" (I translate that to mean culturally and historically formed)
on the term "emotion", where I was basically placing it on the term
"feeling". (...)
Me too.
(...) I disagree with Carl (...)
In fact, He, Ratner, does not explicitlly states such a difference in
VYGOTSKY'S SOCIOCULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY AND ITS CONTEMPORARY APPLICATIONS as
Wallon did does.
But I was conducted to believe Ratner was close to what Wallon advocates on
this issue because of his arguments on his book reffered above :(
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 01:01:17 PST