The Psychology of the EmotionsRibot, Th. (Théodule)
Science
The Psychology of the Emotions
Ribot, Th. (Théodule)
Emotions
(1) We have seen that, for primitive man, everything is alive, full
of arbitrary caprices, desires, intentions, and especially
mysteries, because everything is unforeseen: it is the reign of
universal contingency. The formula, “everything is alive,” is,
however, too absolute; it only suits those things which were seen to
move and change—_i.e._, the majority, not the totality of things. It
seems as if the absence of motion, stability, fixity, the want of
reaction, had been a sort of revelation to a simple mind. Perhaps it
was through the spectacle of the fixity of things that the notion of
order or law made its very humble entry into the world. However that
may be, it is certain that the depersonification of nature began
early to mark the origin of science. In our present state of culture
we find a difficulty in representing to ourselves a state of mind in
which the idea of fixity in natural phenomena is almost _nil_; yet
such a state of mind has existed, and there is no want of documents
to prove it. The expression, “the new moon,” was not at first a
metaphor: men wondered if the sun would always continue his course;
the Mexicans anxiously awaited his new birth every fifty years;
eclipses seemed to happen at random, and caused great terror,
etc.[193] Gradually the spirit of observation and reflection arrived
at constant relations, and introduced into the conception of Nature
the ideas of order and regularity, diminishing in so far the domain
of chance and contingency. This notion of a cosmic order has
influenced religious conceptions; the government of the physical
world was attributed to the gods; they are its regulators; each has
his department where he is supreme. The co-existence of two opposite
principles has been remarked in the religion of several nations in
this period of their development: necessity being personified in an
abstract, mysterious, inaccessible deity (Rita among the Aryans, Ma
with the Egyptians, Tao with the Chinese, Moira or Nomos with the
Greeks, etc.[194]); while contingency, or rather limited arbitrary
power, was personified in more human gods having their legends,
acting within their own special sphere, as, for instance, the gods
of Greece. The latter are also sometimes divided into two
categories, which is the first step towards simplification, one kind
bestowing physical well-being—health, prosperity, riches; the other
inflicting physical ills—disease, famine, tempest, shipwreck.
-----
Footnote 193:
For the facts see Goblet d’Alviella, _op. cit._, p. 178.
Footnote 194:
Goblet d’Alviella, _ib._, pp. 176-198.
-----
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account