Acidae and Basis: Phulisophies of Interaction

A detailed Summary of Acidae and Basis: Phulisophies of Interaction

In many theories of social construction a great deal of debate focuses on whether or not the most fundamental aspect of human nature, emotion, is, itself, a product of social construct. Emphasis supporting this claim seems to orbit around the notion that certain emotions that existed at one time in a particular culture have waned or ceased to exist all together. It is my belief, however, that it is impossible to categorize or label an emotion purely by virtue of its public display, or lack thereof. Therefore, the idea that emotions are socially constructed seems to be nothing more than the idea of an ever-changing cultural perspective of linguistic framework.

One of the emotions brought up in social construction argument is accidie. Before we can decide the role of this emotion in the context of social construction, it is important to understand exactly what is meant by the word. Accidie, in its simplest form, means the rejection of life. It has been likened to more contemporary terms such as sloth or laziness; however, these ideas seem to have a more trivial nature when juxtaposed with the original cultural significance of accidie. (Harre & Finlay-Johns 1986) Unlike its counterparts, accidie

is a form of spiritual despair, a refusal of grace, or in the words of Chaucer, "a bargain with nothingness that shuts out God's gift of new possibility." (Brown, 2001) Accidie is a spiritual listlessness, a reluctance or a refusal to respond to a higher power.

Initially, I should state that there seems to be a common misleading thread to the articles written by Harre and Fimlay-Johns. It seems, in my opinion, that there is a confusion regarding the definition of what constitutes an emotion. The confusion being on my part, since the afore mentioned authors seem to share a common notion. It seems that the articles seem to focus more on actions and pretenses associated with emotion, rather than emotion itself. That is to say that emotion seems to be judged by what society observes, not the emotion itself.

The philosophical idea that accidie went through a cycle of life, death and possible rebirth is absurd for several reasons. (Griffiths 1997) Foremost, it is a theory that cannot be tested and is solely based on the norm of society. Throughout our brief history on this planet, societal norms have undergone many changes. Regardless of these changes, a core cluster of emotions have always existed. Although society and culture have evolved and new situations have arisen which could not be experienced in previous societies, these situations still encompass a set of emotions which can be reduced to five basic states. Joy, disgust, fear, grief, and longing are the core components of every known emotion either in itself or combined with any number of its counterparts. Accidie, for example, is the name given to how a given person deals with a specific situation involving grief of an unknown or subconscious nature, longing for something new in his or her life, and possibly a level of disgust with the current situation. The same emotional equation could be carried out at any given point in time and in any given culture, provided that there is the idea of a higher

Some common words found in the essay are:
Harre Fimlay-Johns, Harre Finlay-Johns, Accidie Basis, English Dictionary, linguistic framework, social construction, emotional equation, Word Count, linguistic framework simply, fear grief, griffiths 1997, person disease, product social, social construct, particular culture, emotions existed,

Approximate Word count = 1339
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: Miscellaneous