The Epistemic Value of Affective Disruptability

Abstract

In order to explore how emotions contribute positively or negatively to understanding the meaning of complex socio-culturally specific phenomena, I argue that we must take into account the habitual dimension of emotions – i.e., the emotion repertoire that a feeling person acquires in the course of their affective biography. This brings to light a certain form of alignment in relation to affective intentionality that is key to comprehending why humans understand situations in the way they do and why it so often is especially hard to understand things differently. A crucial epistemic problem is that subjects often do not even enter a process of understanding, i.e., they do not even start to consider a specific object, theory, circumstance, other being, etc. in different ways than the familiar one. The epistemic problem at issue thus lies in an unquestioned faith in things being right the way they are taken to be. By acknowledging the habitual dimension of affective intentionality, I analyze reasons for this inability and suggest that being affectively disruptable and cultivating a pluralistic emotion repertoire are crucial abilities to overcome this epistemic problem.

Hell Hath No Fury: The Place of Revenge in Moral Repair

“…This is true both of her purposeful plans for revenge on behalf of Nina, and her more aimless-though arguably vengeful-practice of disturbing would-be rapists by suddenly revealing her sobriety. In both cases, Cassie's vengeful strategies are in line with philosophers like Macalester Bell (2013), Ami Harbin (2016), and Imke von Maur (2022) who argue that experiences of cognitive and affective disorientation, disturbance, and disruption can be valuable for moral agency, shaking our complacency and settled, habitual expectations, inviting us to recognise the reasons we have for doing and thinking differently, forcing us to ask: "how can I go on?" In other words, disorienting shocks of the kind that Cassie inflicts can play a role in holding wrongdoers accountable and in having them internalise that accountability.…”

Affective Ruptures: A Pragmatist Approach

“…Astonishment, wonder , surprise , uncertainty, suspicion are frequently disruptive emotions that have the role of recomposing new ways of being involved. This concerns the epistemic dimension of every emotion (Candiotto, 2019; von Maur, 2022) and its role in the inter-corporeal and inter-affective development of social life.…”

“…“Moral” emotions manifest as “feelings of approval or disapproval” (Jasper, 2018, p. 4) and are always at risk of violation, disrupting the taken-for-granted and producing moral shock. von Maur (2022), conversely, argues that disruptions result from prereflective resistance and the inability to integrate new information that does not harmonize with what is familiar. Disturbances can therefore transform the ways of aligning, through a break into a harmonious interaction.…”

“…But the disruptive dimension of emotions, together with its social consequences, deserves to be further discussed and articulated. 2 Although there are theoretical and empirical reflections on the role of disruption in affectivity (Anderson, 2010;Katz, 1999;Schütze et al, 2022;Scott, 2021;von Maur, 2022), the pragmatist vision allows us to rethink its articulation and development in everyday life. Affective ruptures are the moments in which affective habits enter into crisis in the face of the unpredictability of events and must be reconstituted in new ways by employing emotional reflexivity.…”

Situated Affectivity and Mind Shaping: Lessons from Social Psychology

“…Suffice it to point out that since mind shaping (or invasion) largely bypasses conscious control mechanisms, it can potentially provide a way out of frustrating deadlocks that occur when different social groups have come to be so deeply situated in irreconcilable "little worlds" (von Maur, 2021a) that rational arguments turn out to be ineffective. Status-conscious SUV drivers on the one hand and Fridays for Future Activists on the other (Schuetze, 2021), for instance, or digitally native Instagrammers and TikTokers on the one hand and many of their parents and teachers on the other (von Maur, 2021a) are so deeply attuned to their respective worlds that a reasonbased engagement with the other's view becomes well-nigh impossible (von Maur, 2021b). A red-hot example is the highly charged debate between COVID-19 sceptics and vaccination refusers on the one hand and health authorities, immunologists, politicians and the sane majority on the other.…”