Emotional Meanings (Critical Analysis of the Essay for ADP/B.Sc English Students)

Critical Analysis of the Essay "Emotional Meanings"for ADP/B.Sc English Students

This an interesting and thought provoking essay written by Robert Thouless in “Straight and Crooked Thinking”. He says that there is a variety to use the words in different situations. Usually the words can be used in two ways.

i.                    Emotionally 

ii.                  Objectively / scientifically

The main purpose to use the words is to convey the idea. Words are often used to describe a thing or point out some of its aspects properly. When we use a word in speech and writing, its most obvious purpose is to point to something or relation or property. This is the word's "meaning." We see a small four-footed animal on the road and call it a "dog," indicating that it is a member of the class of four-footed animals, we call dogs. The word "dog" as we have used it there has a plain, straightforward, "objective" meaning. We have in no way gone beyond the requirements of exact scientific description.

Let us suppose also that one grandparent of the dog was a collie, another was an Irish terrier, another fox terrier, and the fourth a bulldog. We can express these facts equally scientifically and objectively by saying that it is a dog of mixed breed.

Suppose, however, that we had called that same animal a "mongrel". The matter is more complicated. We have used a word which objectively means the same as "dog of mixed breed", but which also arouses in our hearers an emotional attitude of disapproval toward that particular dog. A word, therefore, can not only indicate an object, but can also suggest an emotional attitude toward it.

Such suggestion of an emotional attitude does go beyond exact and scientific discussion because our approvals and disapprovals are individual - they belong to us and not to the objects we approve or disapprove of. An animal which to the mind of its master is a faithful and noble dog of mixed ancestry may be a "mongrel" to his neighbour whose chickens are chased by it.

There is a well-known saying that the word "firm" can be declined as follows: I am firm, thou art obstinate, and he is pigheaded. That is a simple illustration of what is meant. "Firm," "obstinate," and "pigheaded" all have the same objective meanowever they have their different emotional meanings. Each word excites different feelings of liking and disliking.

 Firm is a positive word. It indicates determination or resolution.  It describes the positive quality of person. Obstinate is a bit negative. It means difficult to control or manage.  Whereas pig headed is a strong disapproval. It means stupidly stubborn.

Swinburn , a famous English poet uses the word “Whelps and Dams” in one of his war poems in an emotional context. Both the words mean in an objective manner “Children and Wives”. But in the poem the poet uses them to mean “enemy”, the line of the poem suggest that young ones and females of wild beasts are fit to be killed.

In this essay, Robert H. Thouless argues that scientific or objective use of words is required in life, politics and religion. He disapproves of the emotional use of the words in life. However he points out that the use of emotionally toned words is not of course, always to be condemned. In poetry, the emotional use of words is required. In poetry or in some kind of prose, the arousing of suitable emotions is an important part of the purpose for which the words are used.

In "The Eve of St. Agnes, "Keats has written:

Full on this casement shone the wintry moon,

And threw warm gules on Madeline's fair breast.

These are beautiful lines. Let us notice how much of their beauty follows from the proper choice of emotionally coloured words and how completely it is lost if these words are replaced by neutral ones. The words with strikingly emotional meanings are casement, gules, Madeline, fair, and breast. Casement means simply a kind of window with emotional and romantic associations. Gules is the heraldic name for red. Madeline , is simply a girl’s name, another name will mar the romance and beauty of the poem. Fair , simply means, that her skin was white, but here the word is used in the emotional context and it suggest beauty. Breast also has the emotional meaning. It cannot be replaced by chest. The write suggest that the poem will lose much of its meanings and value if the emotionally charged words are replaced by the objective words.

Let us now try the experiment of keeping these two lines in a metrical form, but replacing all the emotionally coloured words by neutral ones, while making as few other changes as possible. We may write:

Full on this window shone the wintry moon,

Making red marks on Jane's uncoloured chest.

No one will doubt that all of its poetic value has been knocked out of the passage by these changes. Yet the lines still mean the same in external fact; they still have the same objective meaning. It is only the emotional meaning which has been destroyed.

The purpose of the present essay is to deal with the kind of problem in which cold and scientific thinking is required. Most of the practical problems of life are of this order. The fact that I shall abuse the use of emotional thinking in connection with such problems as tariffs, social ownership, revolution, and war does not mean that there is no place for emotional thinking.

 Poetry, romantic prose, and emotional oratory are all of inestimable value, but their place is not where responsible decisions must be made. The common (almost universal) use of emotional words in political thinking is as much out of place as would be a chemical or statistical formula in the middle of a poem. Real democracy will come only when the solution of national and international problems is carried out by scientific methods of thought, purged of all irrelevant emotion. Into the action which follows decision we can put all the emotion which we have refused to allow in our thinking. Let us think calmly and scientifically about war, and then actively oppose it with all the passion of which we are capable.

When we turn to polities and international questions, we are still further form straight scientific thinking. Such words as "Bolshevik," "Fascist," "reactionary," "revolutionary," "constitutional,' "national honour," etc, are all words used in national and international political thinking which carry more of emotional than of any other meaning. So long as such words are the ordinary terms of rival politicians, how can we hope to think straight in national and international affairs?

We must look forward to and try to help on the day when the thinking about political and international affairs will be as unemotional and as scientific as that about the properties of numbers or the atomic weights of elements. The spirit of impartial investigation of facts by irrelevant emotions has given us great advances in the sciences. Its triumphs will be even greater when it is applied to the most important affairs of life.

The writer does not favour the use of emotional words in matters where important decisions about life are to be made. Emotional words add beauty in art and poetry. But the common use of emotional words in political thinking is quite undesirable and dangerous. It is as much out of place as we use a chemical formula in the middle of the poem. According to the writer, real democracy will come only when the solution of national and international problems is carried out by scientific methods of thought. The writer is of the view that we should take decision regarding politics in a cool manner.

The writer favours the use of objective and scientific words in politics and war. Most of the quarrels and controversies in religion , politics and daily affairs of life arise due to the wrong use of the words. In his view most of the quarrels and disputes in life can be avoided by the unemotional use of words.

The writer suggests the following things to make our emotional thinking, scientific thinking and non emotional.

i.                    The reader should underline all the emotional words in a text and replace them with objective words.

ii.                  He should examine the new form of the passage. Whether it is giving the same meanings or not.

iii.                The writer points out that we should condemn the use of emotional words in our speeches and writings. We should remember that it is a symptom of more deep rooted evil.

There is a great distinction between prejudice and opinion. We can form an opinion about any matter of life. This opinion is mostly based on thinking. Our thinking about a thing is largely unemotional and scientific. It is based on our observation and experience. Prejudice is a form of thinking based on our emotional thinking. It has the colour of our liking or disliking. Prejudice against or for a person is never just or rational. It reflects our feelings of hatred and love for a thing or a person.

More over moral judgment is different from scientific judgment.  It depends on the moral vision of man.  It gets the inspiration from the religious learning of man. A man may be a revolutionary and a freedom fighter for a certain person but the same man looks to a terrorist to another person. Man is the same but there are two labels to describe him.

Whereas a scientific judgment is unprejudiced. It is unbiased and non emotional. It is rational and uniform. It does not depend upon personal liking or disliking. That is why there is no controversy about any scientific judgment. There are a lot of conflicts and controversies about the moral judgment. When we use such words in our expression as “Revolutionary , Reactionary , Communist and Fascist” , we are making moral judgment.

Colouring of emotions with words used by the parties makes it impossible for all to look at the facts objectively and impersonally. So we must try to look at the things objectively if we desire for getting solid and serious results in the above named fields of life which are very important fields of personal, social and national life.

    

Q.1. What is the precise difference between Emotional meaning and Objective meaning? / Why cannot controversies in politics, morals and religion be settled when emotionally toned words are used?

Ans. The precise difference between emotional meaning and objective meaning is that objective meaning is the neutral and impersonal meaning without any colouring of emotion, whereas, the emotional meaning is the real meaning added with an emotional meaning/colouring. Objective meaning is the real, unbiased, unprejudiced, colourless and scientific meaning. On the other hand, emotional meaning is the real meaning plus a colouring of emotions of any type with it.

The writer says that emotional words are used to create specific sympathy for one and hatred for other. By the use of these words, political, religious and moral controversies cannot be settled. The writer suggests that we should grapple the solution of all national and international problems by scientific methods of thought, which should be pure from irrelevant emotions.

When we associate our own liking and disliking to a thing , it means that we have attached emotions to it. If we call a dog of mixed breed as ‘Mongeral’ it means that we have tried to arouse in our hearers an emotional attitude of disapproval towards that particular dog. Such an emotional attitude is non scientific because approvals and disapprovals are individual. They belong to ourself and not to the object we approve or disapprove. Similarly a Negro may be a coloured man to a neutral observer but the use of the word Nigger , in place of Negro is bound to produce contempt. It is the emotional use of the word.

Robert A Thouless gives us a list of words which have the same meaning but they express different emotional meanings. The words firm , obstinate and pig headed express the same meanings. Here each word expresses different emotional meanings. Firm is a positive word. It expresses the positive quality of a man. Whereas Obstinate is a bit negative word. It expresses light disapproval. Pig headed shows disapproval. Swineburn , a famous English poet uses the words Whelps and dams in one of his war poems in emotional context , having the meaning of enemies. Whereas objectively Whelps and dams means “Children and wives”.

After differentiating between emotional meaning and objective meanings, the writer says that we should abuse the use of emotional thinking in connection with such problems as tariffs, social ownership, revolution, and war. It does not mean that there is no place for emotional thinking. Poetry, romantic prose, and emotional oratory are all of places where emotional thinking can be applied. But it has no place where responsible decisions must be made. Real democracy will come only when the solution of national and international problems is carried out by scientific methods of thought. When we make decision, we should keep all emotions away and think calmly and scientifically.

Robert H Thouless does not favour the use of emotional words in matters where important decisions about life are to be made. Emotional thinking does occupy some place in life but mostly it upsets the smooth running of life. For example , the use of emotional words in poetry and art lends beauty to our expression. But the common use of emoltional words in political thinking is undesirable. It is as much out of place as a chemical formula in the middle of a poem. According to the writer , real democracy will come only when the solution of national and international problems is carried out by scientific method of thought.

In the view of the writer , most of the quarrels and controversies in religion , politics and daily affairs of life arise due to the wrong use of words. The disputes can be avoided by the objective use of words in our daily life. Emotional thinking in politics can blow up the whole fabric of human civilization.

As far as the opinion and prejudice are concerned, they carry a great distinction. We can form an opinion about any matter of life. This opinion is mostly based on thinking. Our thinking about a thing is largely unemotional and scientific. It is based on our observation and experience. Prejudice is a form of thinking based on our emotional thinking. It has the colour of our liking or disliking. Prejudice against or for a person is never just or rational. It reflects our feelings of hatred and love for a thing or a person.

Opinion and prejudice differ in another way. The words of an opinion do not have any emotional colouring, whereas the words used in a biased manner have emotional colouring within them. For example, if I say this is a bad toy. This is an opinion which I have formed after having a look at the toy. But if I say I don’t like such evil or malicious toy, I should be using a prejudiced word. I am arousing the sentiment for the toy. The use of word malicious or evil is a prejudiced word. To form opinion about a matter is a healthy thing but to have prejudiced for or against a thing is an unhealthy thing.