[...]be proven wrong or incomplete in a very short time
(*written as progress reports on findings in ongoing research* --> article)

}--> this makes it dangerous for humanity scholars to take advantage of scientific research

[*]emotion
cognitive psychology --> humanistic + social-scientific theories of emotions --promoting--> (fables of)
•universal basic emotions: happiness, anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise [--> regardless what these terms might be in other languages other than english, or even if there are equivalent concepts]
•emotions do not occur in language but are physically manifested in the face [--> micro-expression in business negotiations]
•(the fable of) artworks can convey emotions accurately and reliably across time and culture [---> go to the fable of *unmediated response* + emotional appeal of “great art"]
•distinguish the essential from the optional, to capture the invariant, to break complex concepts into maximally simple ones [conceptual primes + lexicogrammatical universals] (<-- Wierzbicka's NSM)

=/=

•emotion --> Joseph leDoux 1996
•emotion --> Klaus Scherer 1979
•affects --> Deleuze and Guattari 1980
•perasaan hati --> indonasia 1980
•affect --> Massumi 2002
•emozioni --> Cesare Lombroso 1976

social constructivism approach:
•emotional experience is not precultural but preeminently cultural --> Lutz

anthropological approach l:
•metaphors/words for different emotions --Kovecses--> individuals choose to conceptualize their emotions differently within the constraints impressed on them by in universal physiology {*force: the primary emotional metaphor*}
•body-based constructivism

(William Reddy >) emotive: (for example saying “i am happy.”) performative (effects change) + constative (describes the world)
•emotive utterance --> getting through of something nonverbal into verbal --> failure of representation --> a person
}--Elias-->
•logocentric concept of emotive <-- comes from speech act theory (there is no evidence that thinking and saying out loud “i am happy” have the same effects, or forcing one self to smile)
•there is no reason to consider one action more or less descriptive than performative than the other [--Sina--> my whole work has been about arguing the performativity of descriptive acts, there are no descriptions that do not generate emotions]
•lack of methodological distinction between (anthropological) fieldwork [: subject is changed by the presence of researcher] =/= historical research
•problem of synchrony in “emotive” <-- ignoring memory, aspiration (on the list of the emotional actor)

emotional states can be evoked or avoided(?)
conditions can be manipulated with the goal of shaping emotions in the future


emotion and its affects
•emotion --> medicated and sustained
•affect (a very recent idea) --> ephemeral instantaneously rises and dissipates (leaving residual effects)
}<-- a heuristic device (difference) to highlight different kinds of experiences, their perception and impact

affect is under inquiry in understand:
•customer culture
•entertainment industry
•
•(individual located in larger communities)

[*]affect: embodied thought : culturally and corporealy informed cognition = thoughts + apprehension “i am involved”
[emotion = i am involved]

(Elias) arguments in favor of affect (affect-culture):
1. (help us to understand) relationship between *(human) bodies, nature, action*
2. explains cooperative living, sacrifice, generosity, attachment, affection (better than theories that focus on economics, politics, power)
3. critical apparatus for gaining knowledge from human interaction and social movements --understand--> future
(concept of) affect --> productive way of understanding human attitude and behavior

_____________
affect theory
•(Spinoza ==>) Deleuze's ethnology of bodily capacities ==> Massumi
•(Darwin --?-->) Tomkins's psychobiology and differential affect ==> Sedgwick

Tomkins
basic affect transcend culture
durable and socially meaningful

Deleuze
[*]affect = innateness + external stimuli, “entire, vital modulating field of myriad becomings across human and nonhuman”

Spinoza
“no one has yet determined what the body can do”
1. the body's capacity is not determined by the body alone but that it is amplified and assisted by its external context
2. even though we might not understand the videos nature, we can comprehend how a specific body functions in a particular social context
•affectus --> the force of an affecting body =/=
•affectio --> impact of an affecting body on the one affected (==generate==> bodily capacities)
[*]affect: a relational phenomena that draws that draws together: a body + sentient aspects of the human being inhabiting it + social context within which that person is embedded

Massumi
(--> self-professed affect theorists)
[*]affect: essentially bodily, pre-social (=/= asocial), filled with motion, vibratory motion, resonation, a nonconscious (never-to-be-conscious) automatic remainder
visceral perception
precognitive visceral moment (=/= physical reaction)
--> think of affect in virtual terms {virtual: sphere of potential + emergent + indeterminate tendencies}
***conscious perception = narration of affect*** [to perceive = to narrate your affects ---> go to #feedback of artwork: actualization of the affective event (?can it include the excess of affect, the virtual?), feedback: narration of unconscious perception] --Massumi--> outside of this perception is the virtual domain (nonconscious automatic remainder, disconnected from meaning) []
--> “affect is the whole world” (<-- Massumi's attraction to indeterminacy)
--Sina--> affect: the deep historical remainder (fossil) of a pre-civilizational (pre-social) open-ended togetherness (I-am-involved-ness)

Flatley
affect --> (nonvirtual) they come out unpredictability in dreams and physical symptoms
(interaction of) affect + habit, belief, thought, ideas = emotion


neuropolitics: neurobiological universals can predictively manifest themselves


article =/= book (more rewarded in the humanities)

...technical, symbolic, formula-filled language of scientific research


antirationalism of turn to body in affect theory --Leys--> “the claim is that we human beings are corporeal creatures imbued with subliminal affective intensifies and resonances that so decisively influence it condition our political and other beliefs that that we ignore those affective intensities or resonances at our peril--not only because doing so leads us to underestimate the political harm that the deliberate manipulation of our affective lives can do but also because we will otherwise miss the*potential for ethical creativity* and transformation that ‘technologies of the self’ designed to work on our embodied being can help bring about.”



enterprise of theorizing affect --Elias-->

(1) ideologically driven by an attempt to reverse an imagined poststructuralist theoretical hegemony ==> conscious turn from rational methods --> *asignifying transcendence*
-Massumi's affect: asocial virtual potential (=/= actualizes) ==> affect: unformed & unstructured (potential: transmitable + socially powerful) ~= undefinable & unknowable  ~= unanalyzable & unpredictable <-- not usable as a theoretical concept
Massumi (moving away from linguistic towards t) --> affect becomes ethereal abstraction (=/= historical materiality) removed from the grasp of critical assessment
feeling --> personal & biographical
emotions --> social
affect --> prepersonal (non-conscious experience of intensity)

(2) florid and convoluted use of language --> fail to eschew obfuscation (without it there is not so much to say)
Massumi: “thought strikes like lightning, with sheering ontogenic force. It is felt.” <--Elias-- meaningless metaphor

the notion of precognitive affective event
•do nothing to help one understand the nature of conscious, felt, enacted emotion + its social ramifications
•provides no rubric through which one can engage in comparative analysis (or informed discussion)



(Brennan) affect: physiological in effect, social in origin

(Grossberg) affect: to locat[...]