Eidos and affect: A response to Hook, Sullivan, Dixon and Condor
Baldacchino, Jean-Paul (2011) Eidos and affect: A response to Hook, Sullivan, Dixon and Condor. Ethnicities, 11 (1). pp. 131-135. ISSN 1468-7968
Abstract
My critics point out that I introduce unnecessary conceptual distinctions while failing to draw ones that matter. Both Hook and Sullivan, for example, point out that my article does not differentiate between affect and emotion. Hook also notes that I do not differentiate between the Lacanian registers of the symbolic, the imaginary and the real when discussing identification. He also notes that a number of distinctions I draw are spurious – namely between love and hate and between the Innenwelt and the Umwelt. The substance of the above critique rests almost exclusively on a body of Lacanian and post-Lacanian thought. With Hook, I share a deep respect for the insights offered by Lacanian psychoanalysis. I would, however, like to make a few observations.
Dimensions Badge
Altmetric Badge
Item type | Article |
URI | https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/eprint/10440 |
DOI | 10.1177/1468796810388706 |
Official URL | http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468796810388706 |
Subjects | Historical > FOR Classification > 1701 Psychology Historical > Faculty/School/Research Centre/Department > School of Social Sciences and Psychology |
Keywords | ResPubID25008, Innenwelt, Umwelt, jouissance, neologism, language of emotions, phenomenology, formalism, phenomenological reduction, eidetic reduction, analyst, analysand |
Citations in Scopus | 0 - View on Scopus |
Download/View statistics | View download statistics for this item |