Allan thanks for the 4th comment you made in my last posting ".. the concept of fear, even refined with prefixes like political, religious and physical....isn't specific enough to be useful in any kind of study than what's to characterize how people act/behave/think in a more general way". It is unfortunate that sometimes we end up associating words with the specific contexts in which we usually find them.
A different one: For this past week my wife was struggling with fever and had a very painful throat. I took her to a physician who said hers were some 'Strep Throat Symptoms'. She was put on treatment and the medical doctor further explained that: 'Throat infection with strep bacteria is contagious and can cause a variety of symptoms associated with inflammation of the throat and its nearby structures'.
Here is the dilemma I had to go through. Everybody who heard about my wife's problem continued to emphasize that strep was highly contagious, so I needed to keep distance. With the pain that she was undergoing at times I felt she needed me right next to her and especially my patting and touching during such difficult moments. Though I knew very well what people were telling me by emphasizing the words 'highly contagious', for the most part during her sickness I could not just leave her alone. I felt she needed me close by, during such a difficult moment.
Without necessarily trying to undermine the possibility of contracting a contagious disease like strep throat, but I wonder where fear stands when matters of the heart are at stake? I did not contract the disease but of course I can not generalize my case lest a million people out there will get sick . My question is, Where does fear stand, for instance, when human beings are faced with things like love or even anger? Do people sometimes consciously ignore and/or wrestle with fear itself, in order to do what they fear?
I think it's so interesting.....what we conventionally call fear (again....it's the conceptual use of a word that points to a particular psychological-physical state). The word itself as a concept always stands in need of a description. My fear, my pain....although the fact that they perceived and then communicated with some understanding....don't really capture the completely unique features of situation and particularity.
ReplyDeleteSuch that one could fear getting strep. But in a situational context....my love of the person with it might not prevent me from placing myself at some risk. Situationally, the qualitative nature of my perception and experience of "fear" in this case is different....say....from how I might or night not go to a hospital where many cases of strep has been reported.
In this way, I think there certainly are different kinds of fear....and then even within these general categories....situationally the nature of fear is highly specific and contextual....relative to other thoughts/feelings/experiences we've had.
It's commonly observed that the first time, for instance, that one splits wood with a sharp ax....one fears certain possibilities. Later with skill and practice the nature of these fears changes. They are not perceived or felt in the same way as initially. And this in part informs the qualities/nature of the repeated actions. Later, even when one starts to feel "competent" to do this activity safely and without an active awareness of "fear".... there still is some degree of it present.
This has a parallel to musical performance such as i do. Qualitatively one can be immobilized by fear of performance. Or one can have it compromise the performance in an unsatisfactory way. And yet, one never quite wants to be totally beyond what's called "an edge". So confident that one feels "no fear".
In these two progressions or considerations of "fear" as a quality of my experience.....the presence and quality of the fear changes.
One of things that interests me, as you no doubt know by now, is when we use the word (attempt to describe "fear") does our use of that word convey the particularity of it's nature? Or, are confusions caused by conceptual thinness?
Your example in this posting, and hopefully others I've thought of, point up an issue in study and scholarship. What is the kind of use of a word that gets at the phenomena we most want to understand?
Following Geertz here a bit.... one describes the particulars and situations. Then one can generate a generalization about them that's stated as an hypothesis. Or, one can simply present "kinds of examples" and then discuss similarities and differences.
This approach is different from acceptance of a universal definition or innate trait sort of foundation. It does point to a certain way of approaching sources....and then how this approach is described....
thanks....got me thinking,
Allan
Thanks Ishmael!! It was indeed a difficult time for me with all that pain. I also learnt that There is no fear in love, and true love has no room for fear. I believe if one really loves someone, he can ignore or just let go fear. You become so bold and focused to whatever you what to achieve. You press towards the goal and may be after achieving the goal, you then look back and at times you will be surprised to see the road you have travelled. At times in life we sacrifice and travel through rough and narrow roads (knowingly or unknowingly) in order to show our love.
ReplyDelete