{"title":"Beyond universalism/social constructivism debate in the history of emotions: The case of acedia","authors":"L. Radenovic","doi":"10.2298/theo1904005r","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Peter Toohey (2011) argues that the feeling of acedia, initially described by the Desert Fathers, is a romanticized version of the simple boredom felt by ordinary people. For Toohey, acedia is not real, but manufactured, i.e. a socially constructed emotion, unlike regular boredom which is universally felt. This distinction indicates that Toohey sides with universalist approach to emotions, which helps him avoid relativism of social constructivism in the history of emotions. However, by claiming that acedia is manufactured emotion Toohey is in danger to negate the reality of an emotional experience that many individuals seemed to have had. The goal of this paper is to outline the way we can overcome the shortcomings of Toohey?s approach to acedia. For this purpose, I argue, along with Griffiths (1997), that all our emotions have their roots in both culture and biology. I also argue that a job of a historian of emotions is to engage in the phenomenology of emotions of our predecessors. This article has been corrected. Link to the correction 10.2298/THEO2003169E","PeriodicalId":374875,"journal":{"name":"Theoria, Beograd","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoria, Beograd","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/theo1904005r","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Peter Toohey (2011) argues that the feeling of acedia, initially described by the Desert Fathers, is a romanticized version of the simple boredom felt by ordinary people. For Toohey, acedia is not real, but manufactured, i.e. a socially constructed emotion, unlike regular boredom which is universally felt. This distinction indicates that Toohey sides with universalist approach to emotions, which helps him avoid relativism of social constructivism in the history of emotions. However, by claiming that acedia is manufactured emotion Toohey is in danger to negate the reality of an emotional experience that many individuals seemed to have had. The goal of this paper is to outline the way we can overcome the shortcomings of Toohey?s approach to acedia. For this purpose, I argue, along with Griffiths (1997), that all our emotions have their roots in both culture and biology. I also argue that a job of a historian of emotions is to engage in the phenomenology of emotions of our predecessors. This article has been corrected. Link to the correction 10.2298/THEO2003169E
Peter Toohey(2011)认为,最初由沙漠之父描述的绝望感是普通人所感受到的简单无聊的浪漫化版本。对图希来说,绝望不是真实的,而是人为制造的,也就是说,它是一种社会建构的情绪,不像普通的无聊是普遍存在的。这种区别表明图希站在情感的普遍主义立场上,这有助于他避免情感史上社会建构主义的相对主义。然而,通过声称绝望是人为制造的情绪,图希面临着否定许多人似乎都有过的情感体验的现实的危险。本文的目的是概述我们可以克服Toohey?S接近绝望。为此,我和Griffiths(1997)一起认为,我们所有的情感都有其文化和生物学的根源。我还认为情感历史学家的工作就是研究前人的情感现象学。这篇文章已被更正。链接到更正10.2298/THEO2003169E