What Relationship Does Kim Jagger See Between Race And Emotion?

Jaggar’s altruistic view of emotion as an inevitable part of human construct is argued to be a more accurate epistemological model. The Western tradition has often distorted the vital role of emotion in the construction of knowledge, ignoring and dismissing the contributions of women and other minorities. This paper examines two distinct but related questions regarding race and emotions.

The first question is that by construing emotion as epistemologically subversive, the Western tradition has tended to obscure the vital role of emotion in the construction of knowledge. Emotions have usually been considered potentially or actually subversive of knowledge, with exceptions from Plato until the present. A methodological framework of gender, discourse, and affect as a structure that “goes-without-saying” is presented, using Hemmings’s concept of affective dissonance as a tool.

Jagger’s general criterion for determining whether an outlaw emotion is appropriate is that emotions are appropriate when they are a characteristic of society in which all humans thrive. Emotions are often associated with the female gender and logic or reason with the male gender.

The second question is about the impact of race on emotions and feelings of equality. The author discusses how emotions can be considered unconventional by the dominant class and how they can be used to improve child welfare services.

The third question explores the fear of negative change in race relations between Black and White students during the election campaign, even on unique and racially diverse individuals. Finally, the article highlights the prevalence of functional constipation (FC) as the most common functional gastrointestinal disorder in children with a pooled global prevalence of 14. 4.

Does Epistemology Exclude Emotion From The Realm Of Reason?

Western epistemology has historically prioritized reason over emotion, yet emotions have not been entirely omitted from rational discourse. Plato's depiction of emotions in the Phaedrus illustrates this, presenting anger and curiosity as impulsive forces that need to be governed by reason. Emotion subtly intertwines with epistemic rationality; for instance, open-mindedness necessitates intellectual empathy, while belief inherently involves an emotional bias toward specific perspectives.

Mainstream epistemology often overlooks emotional factors, relegating them to the context of discovery rather than justification. However, emerging epistemological insights challenge the typical context distinction, suggesting that emotions hold relevant epistemic roles. The complexities arise in recognizing when emotions bolster or disrupt ethical knowledge. Historically, emotional associations have been deemed irrational and linked to femininity, distancing them from rational thought.

Nonetheless, recent explorations highlight emotions as influential in cognitive processes, not necessarily true in a strict epistemic sense. The interplay between emotions and reason presents a nuanced dialogue, with emotions offering potential insights into knowledge acquisition and decision-making while also posing risks to rationality. Thus, a re-examination of emotions within epistemology reveals their indispensable roles in accessing evidence and shaping beliefs, opening new avenues for understanding knowledge and emotion interplay. This emerging discourse indicates a paradigm shift towards acknowledging emotions in epistemic contexts, challenging long-standing views that separatist emotions from rationality.

How Does Western Epistemology View Emotion?

Western epistemology has often approached emotion with skepticism, reflecting a historical contempt similar to its attitude towards sensory observation. This perspective overlooks that emotions, alongside sensory perception, are essential to human survival. Two main epistemological approaches are rationalism, which posits that reason is the source of knowledge, and empiricism, which asserts that knowledge arises from sensory experience.

Recently, however, philosophers in the West have given increasing attention to the role of emotions in knowledge creation, recognizing their potential value rather than viewing them as mere impediments.

Despite a historical bias favoring reason, there is growing acknowledgment that emotions can catalyze epistemic transformation, particularly in collaborative contexts and social movements, where they contribute to alternative perspectives. Emotions play a vital and often underappreciated role in developing knowledge, challenging traditional notions that equate emotion with disruption. This ongoing discourse encourages a re-evaluation of emotions within epistemology, highlighting their significance in shaping both belief and knowledge.

Investigations into how emotions intersect with rationality reveal that open-mindedness and belief itself involve emotional dimensions, suggesting that acknowledging emotions can enhance our understanding of knowledge formation. Overall, this burgeoning interest illustrates the complexity and richness of the relationship between emotions and epistemology.

What Is Jaggar'S Alternative View?

Alison M. Jaggar presents a nuanced perspective by asserting that emotions are integral to the human evaluation process, rather than subordinate to observation, reason, or action. She advocates for understanding emotions as interdependent with other cognitive faculties, rejecting the cultural tendency to view them as independent. Jaggar identifies three pairs of faculties that society often treats separately but which should be seen as interconnected, although one specific pair is omitted from her discussion.

She argues that women are typically more adept at recognizing and interpreting hidden emotions, stemming from their social caretaking responsibilities. Jaggar, drawing parallels with Kant, critiques the positivist and simplistic cognitivist views of emotions, proposing that they play a vital role in shaping knowledge. Her work emphasizes the importance of both ideal and nonideal theories in addressing real-world justice, arguing against reductive views of emotions that fail to acknowledge their complexity.

Throughout her academic career, she has contributed significantly to feminist philosophy, identifying four fundamental feminist paradigms: liberal, Marxist, radical, and socialist feminism, and examining their implications. Her influential texts address issues of oppression and the interplay between gender and societal structures, aiming to reconceptualize feminist political theories within a broader context.

Do Inexplicable Emotions Challenge Dominant Conceptions Of The Status Quo?

Conventional emotions, particularly those experienced by women, can inspire subversive observations that challenge dominant views of the status quo. This exploration reveals a neural mechanism related to overcoming status quo bias, focusing on the IFC/STN regions of the brain. Difficult choices tend to increase acceptance of alternative viewpoints, yet the default ideological stance usually favors maintaining the status quo, posing risks to those who challenge it.

Studies investigate how both status quo challengers and defenders perceive their allies’ and opponents’ attitudes. There’s evidence that suppressing emotions about the status quo can hinder social change by weakening connections between justifying existing systems and emotional responses. Interestingly, ambivalent feelings are often elicited by the status quo, suggestive that it evokes emotions more complex than mere wins or losses. Furthermore, status quo bias (SQB) often skews decision-making towards familiarity, despite dissatisfaction.

This research highlights how mood states influence reliance on defaults, illustrating the struggle between the preference for the status quo and the desire for change. Finally, the interplay between emotions and political engagement is emphasized, suggesting that emotions significantly impact collective actions and sentiments within movements and broader social dynamics.