I am looking for works that may have something to do with our concept of time and how it relates to our emotional experience. Does anyone know of anything that covers this subject? Preferably non-fiction, but I'm not opposed to reading fiction, too.
Perhaps the paper "The time-emotion paradox" will be of some help. I don't know if this is the type of thing you're looking for, though.
I have only talked to one local librarian as of yet, and when I explained what I was searching for, she kind of gave me a blank stare. I think she thought I was crazy... but it was the public library and not a university library. The latter area is where I will be going next.
So far, after what I've skimmed, these appears to sort of dance around the idea I'm exploring, or more specifically appears to look at it from a different angle while at the same time is defining other areas of thought and perspective on the subject that I haven't considered. Absolutely informational, and fascinating stuff. This is exactly what I'm looking for. Thank you very much.
'Trauma and Recovery' by Judith Herman addresses this in relation to processing of traumatic memories over time. Other than that, you can purchase a few scientific articles such as 'Emotions over time' . I find that most articles deal with a specific topic, such as achievement, advertising, relationships etc, by assessing emotional and cognitive responses over a period of time. Judith Hermann's book, even though specifically dealing with traumatic memories, offers a fascinating insight into this very issue precisely because that's what trauma is - memories of a specific event over a long period of time.
according to whom? 'trauma' has other definitions and 'memories of a specific event over a long period of time' can be a positive thing, depending on what those memories are...
@mammamaia: According to me, I thought that was obvious since I said it. I have no intention to bother with 'links to studies' or 'neuropsychiatry 101' every time I decide to share an opinion. But for the sake of clarification, I never implied it was be all end all, the only definition. Trauma, memories, time, like any other term known to man/woman, have many different definitions, depending on perspective. I was describing one unique set of circumstances which can be explained in terms of interplay between emotions, memories and time. Memories and emotions are rudimentary functions deeply ingrained in our psyche. They are eyes our psyche uses. Trauma, relationships and various other psychological and behavioural phenomena are a consequences of interaction between the psyche and our environment, over time. Whilst a pleasant stimulus, when interacting with our emotions, will eventually result in a memory which will, in turn, create or reinforce a positive personality element or experience (such as self-confidence, pleasant sensations etc) another, unpleasant, stimulus will result in trauma, for example. Regardless of the consequence we are focusing on, it will offer insight into basic interactions between emotions, memories and time.
no offense was meant, so i hope none was taken... i only asked because 'that's what...is' seems to be stating a definitive fact, not just your own opinion... and also implies it could be the only thing the whatever 'is' since there was no qualifying wording [e.g., 'that's one thing trauma is'] to indicate otherwise...
@mammamaia : No offence, of course, but also, this isn't an academic environment, so that we have to precisely qualify by adding 'in my opinion' to everything that isn't referenced at the end of the presentation. Having said that, all my opinions on topics such as this one will always be based on facts and experience, which I appreciate can't be automatically assumed, but is still where I'm coming from. Also, I implied no such thing and I wouldn't leap to such a conclusion myself at all. But people differ and I'm glad we can clarify things in follow-up comments.
This is a writers' forum, communication should matter to writers. There are many ways to reference the limitations of a claimed fact without adding IMO to every sentence*. Why should it be OK to assert an opinion as fact in any setting? [/side track] *Notice words like "should" and asking a question indicate an opinion without saying IMO.
I looked at the psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/prin15.htm website and the "time-emotion paradox" and I read the contributor comments above. I think this subject introduced by Golden Ghost is important to writers who do not have an intuitive sense about how their characters should react in any given situation based on the character's emotional connection to the situation. Thank you all for sharing your academic understandings of the subject and your own opinions.
Maybe I should clarify to set-up more of an in depth discussion.. I'm not so much looking for information that describes how our emotional experiences depends on memories, or how memories are dependent upon our concept of time and our ability to remember sequences of events, but I am looking for information that describes how our concept of time is used as a reference point that accelerates our emotional experience, or maybe more specifically, how it acts as a catalyst. How our concept of time relates to our sense of mortality. Example: When we are happy, we want to hold on to such an emotion because, maybe, we have a notion deep in our subconscious that causes us to feel and think that we'll never experience this kind of happiness ever again, before we die. And the converse is true: We experience loss and sadness because, maybe, we have a similar notion in our subconscious mind that causes us to feel and think we'll never get whatever back again, before we die. Due to our concept of time, I think, our sense of mortality is heightened, because we can better perceive or understand the inevitable coming of our death. Does that make more sense? /discuss
Ok, then you want to read Heidegger's 'Being and Time' and generally look into Existentialism, both as a philosophical discipline and psychological theory.
Being and Time, from what I remember, talks about emotion and mood, but it doesn't relate those things to one's concept of time.
@thirdwind: I remember it more as discussing authenticity vs inauthenticity of everyday existence and Dasein being grounded in temporality. But it's a complex work that is difficult to intuitively understand. Sartre is much easier on the poor brain
