Is embarrassment an irrational feeling

Feeling from the point of view of emotion research

Literature and feeling pp 54-113 | Cite as

Part of the Konzeption Empirische Literaturwissenschaft book series (KEL)

Summary

In the following, an attempt is made, on the one hand, to summarize necessary basic knowledge that is now considered capable of consensus within emotion research, and, on the other hand, to present a selection of those scientific feeling concepts that were developed in cognitive, language and communication-oriented interdisciplinary emotion studies. A representative cross-section of emotional theory approaches cannot be provided due to the large number and variety of concepts.29 The selection and structure of the first three sub-chapters (Chapters 4.2–4.4: Physiology, Psychology and Sociology of Emotions) are based on the description levels (cf. Chapter 2) of the (neuro-) physiological, the (cognitive) psychological and the the sociological anchoring of literary communication. Following this, some of the questions that arose in the course of the historical discourse on aesthetics and feeling (cf. Chapter 3) are taken up and re-perspectives from the perspective of current research on emotions. The selection of topics is based on the theoretical adequacy and productivity for current literary problems; In this sense, the areas of emotion, language (memory, communication, enculturation) and creativity (motivation, intuition, imagination) are dealt with separately (Sections 4.5.1–4.5.5). The chapter ends with a summary (Section 4.6).

"Only in wonderland can a grin he divorced from the cat."

(J. Dewey)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

literature

  1. Corresponding overview representations can be found in Clark / Fiske 1982; Euler / Mandl 1983; Emde 1984; Eckensberger / Lantermann 1985; Ekman / Scherer 1984; Emde 1984, Mandl / Huber 1983; E. Roth 1991; Scherer / Ekman 1984; Schmidt-Atzert 1981; Ulich 1982; Ulich / Mayring 1992. Google Scholar
  2. In addition, comparable human medical examinations are carried out on human brains; These are patients who are impaired by birth or accidental damage or who have to have diseased parts of the brain removed.Google Scholar
  3. Cf. on this and on the question of lateralization (cf. next chapter), among others: Benowitz et al. 1984; Benson / Zaidel (Eds.) 1985; Bösel 1986; Cevey 1984; Davidson 1984; Gainotti, G./C. Caltagirone (Eds.) 1989; Heath 1986; Hollmann 1985; Larbig 1983; Levy 1976; Perecman (Ed.) 1983; Rosenbaum 1976; Ulich / Mayring 1992. Google Scholar
  4. Overviews of the current state of research can be found in Klix / Hagendorf 1986; Schmidt 1991. Google Scholar
  5. Cf. the relevant assessment by Koestler 1967, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. Cf. also Ardila / Ostrosky-Solis 1984; Plutchik / Kellermann 1980. Google Scholar
  7. Cf. the first descriptions of the “pleasure centers” (Olds / Milner) .Google Scholar
  8. Cf. note 31; also: van der Geest 1981; Heeschen 1981; Jakobson 1981; Left 1981; Reischies 1981; all articles in: “Language and Brain” by Schnelle 1981.Google Scholar
  9. More detailed descriptions can be found in Erdmann 1983; Schmidt-Atzert 1981; Voigt / Fehm 1983.Google Scholar
  10. Cf. Erdmann 1983: 122; In this context, factors of the “biological variability” aspect mentioned by Thompson (1988) also emerge. Google Scholar
  11. Cf. more on this in Schmidt-Atzert 1981; Ulich / Mayring 1992. Google Scholar
  12. Cf. on this, reviews in Eckensberger / Lantermann 1985; Izard 1986; E. Roth 1989; Scherer 1983; Ulich 1982. Google Scholar
  13. On the cognitivist tradition: cf. i.a. Arnold 1960; Averill 1980; Lantermann 1983; Lazarus 1984; Mandler 1975; Pribram 1970; Weiner 1985; on the tradition of developmental psychology: cf. i.a. Bastick 1982; Bearison 1986; Emde 1984; Hollmann 1985; Izard 1986; Kuhl 1983h; E. Roth 1989; on the social-psychological tradition: cf. i.a. Carver / Scheier 1982; Ciompi 1985, 1986; Huber / Mandl 1983; Izard et al. 19852; Piaget / Inhelder 1981; Santostefano 1986.Google Scholar
  14. Cf. “Organizational Approach” according to Campos / Barrett 19852; (after, among others, Charlsworth 1962); this approach is among the most interesting non-dualistic approaches currently being discussed.Google Scholar
  15. All model forms cannot be represented in the following with sufficient accuracy; corresponding detailed explanations can be found in Bredenkamp / Wippich 1977; Engelkamp 1984; Klix 1990; Neisser 1976; Tergan 1986. In this context, the alternative proposals that have existed for some time through so-called “brand-feature models” should not be forgotten; cf. on this Herrmann 1985. Google Scholar
  16. The explanations given for the term schema represent a way of describing this concept, which has meanwhile been used in a wide variety of models; the transitions to the frame and script model are also partly fluid. On the scheme term cf. i.a. Boesch 1984, Engelkamp 1984; Fiske 1982; Graesser 1981; Hoppe-Graff 1981; Rumelhart, 1977; Spiro 1982; on the script term cf. i.a. Belezza / Google Scholar
  17. Cf. also Bastick 1982; Bruner 1986; Ciompi 1985; Emde 1984; Kuhl 1983a, b; Scheier / Carver 1986. Google Scholar
  18. One also thinks of the classic concept of the “double-hind” as an “alternative somatization”. Google Scholar
  19. Verbalization typologies include, among other things, analogies to physiological feelings (heat, tremors, blushing, etc.); cf. also chap. 4.5, 5 and 7 Google Scholar
  20. There is also the reverse case, in which feelings greatly delay the end of a conversation or even make it impossible. In addition to the difficult separation from loved ones, this includes, among other things, “long-term phone calls” (preferably in teenage years) or re-effusions with emotional valve function (à la: “When the heart is full, the mouth overflows”). Google Scholar
  21. The decision to understand emotions as “living systems” (according to Millers 1978) is problematic in my opinion. If one takes a theory of living systems according to Maturana & Co. as a basis, this conceptualization cannot be agreed with; various qualities that characterize living systems are lacking. A similar criticism could therefore be cited here as the Hejls of Luhmann (cf. chapter 2). Google Scholar
  22. In this context, at least the basic assessment of psychoanalytic memory ideas should also be taken into account.Google Scholar
  23. A fundamental alternative conception is the “listener-speaker-system” Herrmanns (1985), in which production and reception parts of a person are conceived within a comprehensive model. Further models for text production can be found in Antos / Krings 1989; Beach / Bridwell 1989; Krings / Antos 1992; Mosenthal et al. 1983. Google Scholar
  24. Cf. also the considerations of MeutschlViehoff (1985) on specific literary elaboration concepts.Google Scholar
  25. Cf. on this inter alia Friedrich 1982; Mees 1988; Marx 1982; Neppl / Boll 1991; Schmidt-Atzert 1987.Google Scholar
  26. Cf. on this inter alia Bredenkamp / Wippich 1977; Hellmann 1985; Tergan 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 1995

Authors and Affiliations