Emotions across Cultures: Ancient China and Greece

342 Pages·2022·20.003 MB·English

by  David Konstan (editor)

EmotionsacrossCultures
Roma Sinica
Mutual interactions between Ancient Roman
and Eastern Thought
Edited by
Andrea Balbo and Jaewon Ahn
Advisory Board
Michele Ferrero, Lee Kangjae, David Konstan,
Fritz-Heiner Mutschler, Carlo Santini, Alessandro
Schiesaro, Aldo Setaioli, Stefania Stafutti
Volume 3
Emotions across
Cultures
Ancient China and Greece
Edited by
David Konstan
Thepublicationofthisvolumewasmadepossiblethroughthefinancialsupportoftheproject
SERICA,theDipartimentodiStudiUmanistici(UniversityofTurin)aswellasofNewYork
University’sCenterfortheHumanitiesandthescholarlydirectionoftheSociétéInternationale
desAmisdeCicéron(SIAC,Paris).
ISBN978-3-11-077990-5
e-ISBN(PDF)978-3-11-078431-2
e-ISBN(EPUB)978-3-11-078434-3
ISSN2512-840X
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110784312
ThisworkislicensedundertheCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
4.0InternationalLicense.Fordetailsgotohttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
CreativeCommonslicensetermsforre-usedonotapplytoanycontent(suchasgraphs,
figures,photos,excerpts,etc.)notoriginaltotheOpenAccesspublicationandfurther
permissionmayberequiredfromtherightsholder.Theobligationtoresearchandclear
permissionliessolelywiththepartyre-usingthematerial.
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2022931229
BibliographicinformationpublishedbytheDeutscheNationalbibliothek
TheDeutscheNationalbibliothekliststhispublicationintheDeutscheNationalbibliografie;
detailedbibliographicdataareavailableontheinternetathttp://dnb.dnb.de.
©2022withtheauthors,editing©2022DavidKonstan,publishedbyWalterdeGruyter
GmbH,Berlin/Boston
Thisbookispublishedwithopenaccessatwww.degruyter.com.
Coverimage:Collageoftwomanuscripts–manuscripthandscrollofDuYu’sCriticalstudyof
SpringandAutumnAnnalsandZuoZhuan,7-8thcentury,locatedattheFujiiSaiseikaiYurinkan
Museum,Kyoto,Japan,andIlluminatedmanuscriptofCicero’sEpistolaeadfamiliares,BLKings
MS23,f.1,17thcentury,digitisedbytheBritishLibrary.
Typesetting:IntegraSoftwareServicesPvt.Ltd.
Printingandbinding:CPIbooksGmbH,Leck.
www.degruyter.com
Preface
ThepresentvolumeistheresultofaworkshopheldinShanghaion17–18October
2019, bearing the title, “Emotions between China and Greece,” sponsored by
New York University, Fudan University, and New York University—Shanghai,
andco-organizedbytheeditorofthisvolumeandYangHuang,ofFudanUni-
versity. The workshop was the successor to another, titled “Emotions across
Cultures: Classical Greek and Arabic,” held in Abu Dhabi on 25–26 February
2015,sponsored by New York University and New York University—Abu Dhabi,
and co-organized by David Konstan and Maurice Pomerantz. I wish to express
here,onbehalfofalltheparticipants,ourprofoundgratitudetoNYU,FudanUni-
versity, and NYU-SH for their support and generous hospitality, and also to
NYU’sCenterfortheHumanities,whichgenerouslycontributedtomakingitpos-
sible the open access publication of this volume. I am pleased too to thank all
those who attended the sessions in Shanghai for their helpful comments and
contributionstothediscussion.Aseditor,Iwishparticularlytoacknowledgethe
collaboration of Yang Huang, without whom this volume would not have been
possible;itisinmanywayshisasmuchasmine.Notallofthepaperspresented
at the workshop appear here, and those that are included have been much re-
vised for publication, but all participants are grateful for the opportunity to
engage in a lively and fruitful exchange of ideas at what, to the best of our
knowledge,wasthefirstworkshopeveraddressedtothistopic.
DavidKonstan,NewYorkUniversity
OpenAccess.©2022DavidKonstan,publishedbyDeGruyter. Thisworkislicensedunder
theCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives4.0InternationalLicense.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110784312-202

Contents
Preface V
DavidKonstan
Introduction 1
ZhaoLu
YouareWhatEatsatYou:AnxietyinMedievalChineseDivinatory
andMedicalManuals 19
DouglasCairns
CanWeFindHopeinAncientGreekPhilosophy?ElpisinPlato
andAristotle 41
MichaelNylan,TrentonWilson
ABriefHistoryofDaring 75
RandolphFord
AngerasanEthnographicTrope:ChangingViewsfromAristotle
toSeneca 143
YangHua
HatredandRevengeinAncientChinaDuringtheQinandHan
(221B.C.-220A.D.):TheExpressionofEmotionsandtheConflict
betweenRitualandLaw 169
StavroulaKiritsi
TragicEmotions–ThenandNow 193
JohnT.Kirby
AnalyzingtheEmotionsacrossThreeAncientCultures:Greece,India,
China 211
YiqunZhou
Gender,SocialHierarchies,andNegativeEmotionsinLiuXiang’s
BiographiesofWomen 279
VIII Contents
CurieVirág
Emotions,MeasurementandtheTechnêofPracticalWisdominXúnzǐ’s
EthicalTheory 303
Contributors 327
Index 329
David Konstan
Introduction
Comparing EmotionsHistorically
Itisnowwidelyacceptedthatthedescriptionofemotionsmaydifferfromone
culture to another. The idea that there is a limited set of so-called basic emo-
tionsthatareuniversalandreadilyidentifiedacrosscultures,whetherbyfacial
expression or some other indicator, has been subjected to devastating criti-
cism.1 What is more, the very idea of emotion as a distinct psychological cate-
gory varies, and indeed is not identified at all in some folk taxonomies of
mentalfaculties.Nevertheless,theemotionsseemtobegroundedin,oratleast
havesomerelationto,certainconstantsofhumannature,andseveraltheories
haveofferedtoexplainjusthow.
One such approach is to distinguish between the immediate object of an
emotion,whichmayvaryevenamongindividualswholiveinthesamesociety,
andsomepropertythattheseobjectsshare.Forexample,FlorianCovaandJu-
lien Deonna observe that, despite differences in their specific objects, all the
objectsofagivenemotionsharesomecommonfeature:
Differentinstancesofanemotion-typewillhavedifferentparticularobjects(e.g.Imaybe
angryatacolleague,andangryatthegovernment),buttheformalobjectwillremainthe
same(e.g.ifIamangry,Iexperienceboththecolleagueandthegovernmentasoffen-
sive).Myvariousepisodesoffear,sadness,guilt,andsoon,willbedirectedatandtake
asobjectsarichvarietyofthings,butIwillalwaysseeasdangerouswhatIfear,seeasa
losswhatIamsadabout,andseeasawrongfulactwhatIfeelguiltyabout.Itisanessen-
tialfeatureofeachemotion-typethatweconstruetheparticularobjectoftheemotionin
awaythatisspecifictothatemotion-type.Inadditiontothefactthatitshedslightonthe
natureofanemotion-type,theformalobjectofanemotionalsoconstitutesafeaturein
virtueofwhichitispossibletoevaluatetheintelligibilityandtheappropriatenessofan
emotion.Forinstance,wewouldsayofaninstanceoffearthatisdirectedatsomething
thatseemsquiteharmlessandinnocuousthatitisunintelligibleorinappropriate.2
Thedifficultywiththisapproachisthatitassumesthat“emotiontypes”arecon-
stant across cultures. Take anger:isthisthe only response to something that is
offensive?Wemaybeangryataninsult,indignantatamiscarriageofjustice,or
1 Forthebasicemotions,cf.Ekman(1973),(1980),(1984),(1992).Inresponsetocriticism,
Ekmanhasrecentlymodifiedhisviewsoastoacceptadegreeofculturalvariationinthe
emotions.
2 Cova/Deonna(2014)450.
OpenAccess.©2022DavidKonstan,publishedbyDeGruyter. Thisworkislicensedunder
theCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives4.0InternationalLicense.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110784312-001
2 DavidKonstan
disgusted by an offensive odor. Again, is guilt the only response to a wrongful
act?Whatoflanguagesthatspeakofshamebutappeartohavenotermthatquite
correspondstoournotionofguilt?Wemaybelieve,asIdo,thatallcultureshave
waysofexpressingpersonalresponsibilityforone’sactions,butitisnotclearto
methattheresultingemotionsshareasingle“formalobject.”
GerrodParrottandNikoFrijdahaveofferedadifferentwayofreducingthe
variety of emotions across cultures to a set of shared experiences. As Parrott
has put it, we may “use the term ur-emotion to refer to the commonalities
sharedbyotherwisedifferentemotionsofvariousspecies.”Parrottexplains:
therearemanydifferencesbetweentheemotionsmarah(inIndonesian),ikari(inJapa-
nese),song(inIfaluk),andanger(inEnglish),butinallofthemtheur-emotionofantago-
nismisevident–allfourareaimedatanobjectthatisappraisedasinterferinginsome
waywithone’sconcerns,andallfourgiverisetoamotivationtostopthatinterferencein
different,culturallyspecificways. . .Therecognitionofthesecomponentsacrosscul-
turesleadstotheintuitionthatthereissomethinguniversalaboutemotions,butitisa
mistaketosupposethatthereexistuniversal“basicemotions”–marah,ikari,song,and
angerarenotthesameemotion!Rather,itisthepresenceoftheur-emotionofantagonism
thatprovidestheintuitionofuniversality.3
Elsewhere,FrijdaandParrottobservethatur-emotionsare“intentionalstates”
thatareaccompaniedbya“modeofactionreadiness,”ofwhichthereareeigh-
teeninall,includingsuchposturesasacceptance,attending,avoid,reject,de-
sire, exuberance, domination, submission, tenseness, and inhibition).4 But is
“antagonism” an emotion, whether ur- or otherwise? Frijda and Parrott affirm
that “Ur-emotions are elicited by events as appraised,”5 which makes them
lookverymuchlikeregularemotions.Whatisitthatdistinguishesantagonism
from,say,“anger”asthetermisemployedinEnglish?
A better course may be to discriminate between emotions proper and a
more elementary kind of response, analogous to emotions, to which we may,
following Silvan Tomkins, apply the label “affect.”6 Tomkins himself was not
consistentintheapplicationofthisdistinction,andithasnothadamajorim-
pactonrecentpsychophysiologicalstudiesoftheemotions.Amoresystematic
differentiation between emotions and proto-emotions was developed by the
Stoics, and more especially by Seneca, writing in the first century A.D. On the
Stoicview,certain kindsof judgmentarespecificto emotionsin thefullsense
of the word and are not shared by pre- or proto-emotions. In his treatise, On
3 Parrott(2012)248.
4 Frijda/Parrott(2011).
5 Frijda/Parrott(2011)410.
6 SeeTomkins(1995).