Comment

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 26, 2024 at 8:35pm

APP Iconada: Vocative Object vs Evocative Object

The terms "vocative object" and "evocative object" pertain to distinct but related concepts often discussed in literature, cognitive poetics, and phenomenology. Here’s a breakdown of their differences:

Vocative Object  （呼唤型物項）

Definition: A "vocative object" refers to something that directly addresses or calls upon the subject, often implying an intentional or direct engagement. The term "vocative" comes from the Latin vocare, meaning "to call." In literary or cognitive terms, it represents objects that summon attention or dialogue with the observer, almost as if they possess a voice or agency.

Function: Vocative objects engage in a sort of conversation with the subject; they compel a response. They are often imbued with a sense of urgency or immediacy, demanding recognition or interaction.

Examples

Letters in ancient poetry that seem to directly address the reader or another character, serving as active agents in communication.

Religious icons or artifacts that "call" to the faithful, not just as symbols but as entities asking for interaction.

A mirror reflecting one's image, metaphorically "speaking" back to the observer.

2. Evocative Object （引發情感的念物、情動物、喚起性物件、回味無窮的物體、觸動心靈的造物、引發共鳴的物品）

Definition: An "evocative object" is something that elicits feelings, memories, or associations within the subject. The term "evocative" comes from the Latin evocare, meaning "to call forth." These objects don't directly engage the subject but rather provoke an inner response, often emotional or imaginative.

Function: Evocative objects trigger a deeper, often subconscious, response that may include nostalgia, inspiration, or a sense of wonder. They don’t "speak" to the observer but rather act as catalysts for personal or collective memory and emotion.

Examples

A childhood toy that brings back memories of early years.

A photograph that evokes a specific time, place, or emotional state.

Natural objects like seashells or stones that stir a sense of place or personal reflection.

Key Differences

Engagement vs. Provocation

Vocative objects actively engage or call out to the observer, establishing a direct connection.

Evocative objects provoke internal responses without direct engagement, often relying on the observer's personal context or experiences.

Agency

Vocative objects possess an agency that suggests they are "speaking" or interacting with the observer.

Evocative objects have no such agency; they do not "speak" but instead "suggest" or "trigger" responses.

Nature of Response

Vocative objects elicit a communicative or dialogical response.

Evocative objects elicit an emotional, imaginative, or reflective response.

These distinctions highlight how objects can influence human perception and interaction differently, either through direct engagement or by quietly stirring inner worlds.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 24, 2024 at 6:00am

爱垦APP: “認知詩學”對人類創造力的影响

“认知诗学”（cognitive poetics）是一个将认知科学与文学研究结合的领域，旨在探讨人类在阅读和理解文学作品时的心理和认知过程。它对人类创造力的影响主要体现在以下几个方面：

理解创造力的认知机制

认知诗学通过研究读者如何在阅读过程中理解、想象和共情，揭示了创造力的认知机制。它表明创造力不仅仅是一种天赋或灵感，而是深深植根于人类的认知功能，如联想、类比、隐喻和象征等。这种理解有助于解释为什么某些文学形式能够激发创作者和读者的想象力。

激发和增强创造力

认知诗学的研究表明，文学作品中的语言、结构和情感内容可以激发读者的大脑活动，从而触发创造性思维。例如，通过使用隐喻和象征，文学作品可以促使读者跨越不同的概念领域，激发新的想法和洞见。这种跨领域的思维方式是创造力的核心。

跨学科的创造性应用

认知诗学不仅应用于文学领域，还可以应用于艺术、设计、教育等其他领域。通过理解认知和情感如何在文学中发挥作用，创作者可以在其他创意工作中运用这些认知技巧，以产生更加富有想象力和情感共鸣的作品。

提升文学创作的创造力

对于作家和诗人来说，认知诗学提供了对读者心理反应的深刻理解，这可以帮助他们在创作过程中更有意识地运用语言和叙事技巧，以产生预期的情感和认知效果。了解读者如何处理文本中的信息，可以帮助创作者更有效地构建故事和诗歌，从而增强其艺术效果和创造性。

促进对创造力的科学研究
认知诗学通过实验和理论分析，为创造力研究提供了科学依据。它为研究人员提供了一种方法，可以量化和分析文学中的创造性过程，从而加深对创造力如何在大脑中运作的理解。这种科学研究不仅有助于文学研究，也对心理学、神经科学和人工智能的发展具有重要意义。

认知诗学通过揭示文学阅读和创作背后的认知过程，深化了我们对人类创造力的理解。它不仅帮助我们理解创造力的认知基础，还为创作者提供了工具，提升他们的创作能力，并促进跨学科的创新应用。

相关：呼唤型造物  evocative object  The Etymology of Vocative Linguistic Theory on Vocative  Conation & Affects Vivo's aesthetics         当符号呼唤象征

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 23, 2024 at 12:14pm

APP Iconada: Conation & Affects

The concepts of Conation and Affects both engage with how human beings interact with the world, but they emphasize different aspects of human experience. Here's a comparative breakdown of the two:

Conation

Definition: Conation refers to the aspect of mental life related to motivation, intention, will, and purposeful action. It encompasses the drive to act, make decisions, pursue goals, and engage with the world in a directed way. In psychological terms, it is often seen alongside cognition (thinking) and affection (feeling) as one of the three primary functions of the mind.

Focus: Conation focuses on the motivational dimension of behavior—how intentions and desires translate into actions. It deals with agency, goaldirected behavior, and the will to influence or change circumstances.

Example: A student deciding to study late into the night to prepare for an exam demonstrates conation. This drive is not just about feeling or thinking but actively choosing to pursue a goal.

Affects

Definition: Affects refer to the emotional experiences, feelings, or states of being that influence how we perceive and respond to the world. Affects encompass both shortterm emotional reactions (like joy, anger, or sadness) and more sustained emotional states.

Focus: Affects are concerned with the emotional and experiential aspects of human life—how we feel, respond emotionally, and are affected by internal and external stimuli. Affect is more about the immediacy of emotional responses rather than deliberate action.

Example: Feeling anxious before a public speaking event is an affective response. This anxiety shapes how one perceives the situation but doesn’t necessarily involve action unless linked with a conative aspect (like avoiding the event).

Key Differences

1. Domain: Conation relates to the will and purposeful actions; affects pertain to feelings and emotional states.

2. Function: Conation drives actions and decisions; affects influence perception and emotional responses.

3. Outcome: Conation results in goaldirected behavior; affects result in emotional experiences that can modify behavior but are not directly about action.

4. Temporal Aspect: Conation is often future-oriented (planning, striving); affects are often present-oriented (immediate emotional response).

Interaction

Conation and affects often work together; for example, an affective state like fear can influence conative decisions (avoiding a risky situation), and strong conative intentions (like determination) can modulate affects (lessening the impact of fear).

Understanding these distinctions helps to clarify how motivations and emotions shape human behavior in complex and interconnected ways.

相关：呼唤型造物  evocative object  The Etymology of Vocative Linguistic Theory on Vocative

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 20, 2024 at 10:17pm

APP Iconada： "theory of calling" & Julia Kristeva 1

[A: Affects P: Percepts P: Powers]

In the psychoanalytic sense, the "theory of calling" can be connected toJulia Kristeva's philosophy, particularly through her exploration of the relationship between the individual’s inner world (the unconscious) and the external social and linguistic structures (the symbolic order).

To understand this connection, it's essential to consider how Kristeva's ideas on language, subjectivity, and the semiotic/symbolic dichotomy relate to the concept of a "calling" or vocation.

The Semiotic and the Symbolic

Kristeva’s Semiotic: In Kristeva's theory, the semiotic is associated with the prelinguistic, bodily drives, and rhythms. It is the domain of emotions, the unconscious, and the instinctual. The semiotic is often repressed or regulated by the symbolic order, which is the realm of structured language, social norms, and laws.

The Symbolic: The symbolic is where identity, meaning, and social order are constructed through language and culture. It is the domain in which the individual finds a place within society by adhering to its rules and norms.

Calling as Semiotic and Symbolic: The concept of a "calling" can be seen as a dynamic interaction between the semiotic and symbolic realms. A calling often arises from deep, unconscious drives (semiotic) and is expressed or realized within the social and linguistic structures of society (symbolic). It can be understood as the individual’s attempt to align their deep inner desires and potentials with an external social role or vocation.

Desire and Drive

Unconscious Desire: In psychoanalytic terms, a calling could be seen as an expression of unconscious desires, which Kristeva associates with the semiotic. These desires may seek expression in a particular vocation or life path, driving the individual toward a certain type of work or creative endeavor.

Sublimation: Kristeva, influenced by Freud, would view the process of sublimation as key here. A calling could be seen as a form of sublimation, where unconscious drives and desires are channeled into socially acceptable and personally fulfilling activities, such as art, religion, or a profession. This process allows the individual to express their inner world while still operating within the symbolic order.

The Subject in Process

Kristeva’s Concept of the Subject in Process: Kristeva introduces the idea of the subject in process, emphasizing that subjectivity is never fixed but is always in a state of becoming, shaped by the constant interplay between the semiotic and symbolic. A calling can be understood within this framework as a key aspect of this process of becoming. It represents a way for the subject to navigate the tensions between their inner desires and the demands of the external world.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 20, 2024 at 10:17pm

Identity and Transformation: A calling can also be seen as a moment of transformation where the individual’s identity is reshaped or redefined. For Kristeva, identity is not static but fluid, and a calling might represent a significant shift or evolution in this ongoing process of identity formation.

Abjection and Transgression

Abjection: Kristeva’s concept of abjection involves the confrontation with what is excluded from the symbolic order—the chaotic, the bodily, the maternal, the semiotic. A calling might involve confronting these abject elements, integrating them into one’s life and work. For example, artists and creators often feel called to explore themes or ideas that are taboo or outside societal norms, bringing the abject into the symbolic through their work.

Transgression: A calling can also be seen as a form of transgression, where the individual pushes the boundaries of the symbolic order to include new meanings, roles, or identities. This transgressive aspect is central to Kristeva’s idea of poetic language, where language itself becomes a site of resistance and transformation.

The Maternal and the Feminine

The Maternal: Kristeva’s work on the maternal and the feminine, particularly in her exploration of the semiotic, can also relate to the idea of a calling. The maternal is associated with the presymbolic, the source of life and creativity, and often represents a powerful, unconscious force that drives individuals towards certain paths or vocations.

The Feminine as Creative Force: Kristeva’s association of the feminine with the semiotic can be linked to the idea of a calling as a creative force. The calling could be seen as the individual’s attempt to articulate and give form to these deep, often unarticulated desires and creative energies, aligning them with a socially recognized role or vocation.

Connecting the "Theory of Calling" with Kristeva’s Philosophy

In summary, the "theory of calling" in a psychoanalytic sense can be connected to Kristeva’s philosophy through several key concepts:

Semiotic Drives: A calling might originate from the semiotic realm, driven by unconscious desires and creative energies that seek expression in the symbolic order.

Sublimation and Identity: A calling could be seen as a sublimated expression of these drives, where the individual finds a socially acceptable outlet for their deepest desires, shaping their identity in the process.

Subject in Process: Kristeva’s notion of the subject in process highlights how a calling might represent a key moment in the ongoing formation and transformation of identity.

Abjection and Transgression: A calling may involve confronting abject elements or transgressing symbolic boundaries, integrating what is excluded or repressed into one’s life and work.

Through these connections, Kristeva’s philosophy provides a nuanced framework for understanding a calling as a complex interplay between the unconscious and the social, the semiotic and the symbolic.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 20, 2024 at 10:13pm

APP Iconada： "theory of calling" & Julia Kristeva 2

[A: Affects P: Percepts P: Powers]

The concept of a "theory of calling" within psychoanalysis generally pertains to understanding an individual's sense of vocation, purpose, or intrinsic drive to pursue a particular path in life. This involves exploring the unconscious motivations, desires, and conflicts that shape one's professional and personal commitments. When examining how this theory connects withJulia Kristeva's philosophy, several key intersections emerge, particularly through her concepts of subjectivity, the semiotic and symbolic, and the formation of identity.

Subjectivity and the Formation of Identity

Theory of Calling—Focuses on how individuals develop a sense of purpose or vocation. Explores the internal motivations and unconscious factors that drive one's professional and personal choices.

Kristeva's Philosophy— Subjectivity: Kristeva emphasizes that subjectivity is not a fixed entity but is continuously shaped through interactions with language, culture, and the unconscious. Interplay of Semiotic and Symbolic: She posits that our identities are formed through the dynamic interaction between the semiotic (prelinguistic, emotional drives) and the symbolic (structured language, societal norms).

Connection:  The "theory of calling" aligns with Kristeva's view that an individual's sense of purpose is a product of both unconscious drives (semiotic) and societal structures (symbolic). Understanding one's calling involves navigating and integrating these two dimensions to form a coherent sense of self and purpose.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 20, 2024 at 10:13pm

Semiotic Drives and Intrinsic Motivation

Theory of Calling— Intrinsic motivation and passion are seen as key drivers behind an individual's vocation.  These motivations often stem from deepseated, sometimes unconscious, desires and needs.

Kristeva's Philosophy— Semiotic: Represents the realm of drives, emotions, and bodily expressions that precede structured language.  Role in Creativity and Innovation: The semiotic is crucial for creative processes, allowing for the emergence of new meanings and expressions beyond conventional structures.

Connection: The intrinsic motivations central to the "theory of calling" can be understood through Kristeva's concept of the semiotic. These drives push individuals toward creative and meaningful pursuits, often challenging societal norms and contributing to personal and cultural innovation.

Language, Communication, and Expressing the Calling

Theory of Calling— Communication about one's vocation involves articulating personal values, goals, and motivations. Language plays a crucial role in shaping and expressing one's sense of purpose.

Kristeva's Philosophy—Symbolic Order: Language structures our reality and social interactions, providing the framework within which we express and negotiate our identities.  Intertextuality: The idea that texts (or expressions) are influenced by and connected to other texts, reflecting the complex nature of meaningmaking.

Connection: Articulating one's calling requires navigating the symbolic order of language to express semiotic drives. Kristeva's notion of intertextuality suggests that our understanding and expression of our vocation are influenced by broader cultural narratives and discourses, highlighting the interconnectedness of individual purpose and societal context.

Conflict and Negotiation Between Semiotic and Symbolic

Theory of Calling:  Individuals may experience internal conflicts when their intrinsic motivations (semiotic) clash with societal expectations or norms (symbolic).  Resolving these conflicts is essential for achieving a sense of fulfillment and authenticity in one's vocation.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 20, 2024 at 10:06pm

Kristeva's Philosophy— Tension Between Semiotic and Symbolic: Kristeva highlights the ongoing negotiation between the disruptive, fluid semiotic forces and the stabilizing, structured symbolic order.  Abjection and BoundaryPushing: The semiotic can challenge and destabilize established norms, leading to creative transformations but also potential conflicts.

Connection: The "theory of calling" embodies the tension Kristeva describes, where individuals must reconcile their internal drives with external expectations. This negotiation process is crucial for developing a unique and authentic sense of purpose, reflecting Kristeva's emphasis on the dynamic interplay between different aspects of subjectivity.

Creativity and Transformation

Theory of Calling: Pursuing one's vocation often involves creative expression and the transformation of personal and professional landscapes.  Creativity is seen as a pathway to fulfilling one's sense of purpose.

Kristeva's Philosophy— Revolution in Poetic Language: Kristeva explores how avantgarde and poetic language disrupt conventional structures, allowing for new forms of expression and meaning. Creativity as Liberation: The semiotic dimension fosters innovation and the breaking of boundaries, essential for cultural and personal transformation.

Connection：The creative aspects of pursuing a calling resonate with Kristeva's ideas on how semiotic forces drive innovation and transformation. Engaging in creative endeavors as part of one's vocation aligns with her belief in the liberating potential of the semiotic to challenge and redefine existing structures.

Ethics and Subjective Freedom

Theory of Calling: Emphasizes personal fulfillment and ethical alignment with one's work. Encourages individuals to pursue paths that resonate with their deepest values and desires.

Kristeva's Philosophy— Affirmative Ethics: Kristeva advocates for embracing difference, creativity, and the fluid nature of subjectivity as ethical imperatives. Subjective Freedom: The ability to continually redefine oneself and one's purposes in response to changing internal and external conditions.

Connection:  The ethical dimension of the "theory of calling" is mirrored in Kristeva's affirmative ethics, which prioritize personal authenticity and the continuous evolution of identity. Pursuing a calling, therefore, becomes not just a professional endeavor but an ethical journey towards selfrealization and creative expression.

Summary

The "theory of calling" in psychoanalysis and Julia Kristeva's philosophy intersect through their shared focus on the dynamic interplay between internal drives and external structures in shaping identity and purpose. Kristeva's concepts of the semiotic and symbolic provide a nuanced framework for understanding the unconscious motivations and societal influences that underpin an individual's sense of vocation.

Furthermore, her emphasis on creativity, subjectivity, and the transformative potential of language aligns closely with the pursuit of a meaningful and authentic calling. By integrating Kristeva's insights, the "theory of calling" can be enriched with a deeper understanding of how personal purpose is negotiated, expressed, and actualized within the broader cultural and linguistic context.

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 18, 2024 at 9:46am

爱垦 APP：情动叙事

研究叙事的感性（情动）意义涉及到多个学术领域，包括文学、文化研究、心理学、认知科学等领域。近年来，以下五个课题受到较多关注，并有一些新发现：

情感转向与叙事的情感作用：随着“情感 / 情动转向”（Affective Turn）的发展，学者们越来越重视叙事中情感的传递与共鸣。研究发现，叙事既是信息传递的工具，也是情感体验的媒介，影响了受众的感知和认知，尤其是如何通过情感叙事触发人们的同理心和情感认同。

叙事疗法与自我认同构建：叙事疗法的研究显示，通过个人叙述自己的故事，个体能够重新组织自我认知与身份。学者们发现，叙事不仅可以治愈心理创伤，还能在创造意义、塑造个体自我认同方面发挥作用，特别是如何通过重塑叙事帮助人们克服生活中的困境。

地方感性与叙事地理学：段义孚的“地方感性”理论对叙事的空间感知影响研究有很大贡献。叙事地理学研究发现，叙事不仅反映了故事的时间进程，还与空间体验紧密相连，塑造了人们对地方的情感归属和文化认同，尤其在地方文创和旅游叙事中，这一研究有了较大的突破。

叙事与集体记忆的共创：在社会学和文化研究中，集体记忆和叙事的关系成为研究热点。通过集体叙事，群体能够共同创造并传递他们的历史记忆和文化经验。学者们研究了叙事如何在不同文化背景下，帮助群体维持和重塑其共同记忆，尤其在数字化时代，叙事共创的形式不断演变。

认知叙事学与情感认知的关系：认知叙事学（Cognitive Narratology）研究表明，叙事不仅影响情感体验，还与认知过程高度关联。通过叙事，人们能够理解复杂的情感和心理状态。近年来的研究表明，叙事的结构和内容可以影响个体的情感理解，特别是在文学作品和影视作品中的人物情感刻画对观众或读者情感反应的影响。

这些课题都揭示了叙事不仅仅是传递信息的方式，更是一种复杂的感性体验工具，通过情感、空间、记忆和认知的交织来塑造个体和集体经验。

Comment by 家 在這裡 on September 16, 2024 at 5:02am

爱垦APP：关系诗学元素

卢卡斯（George Lucas）的电影系列《星球大战》，深受坎贝尔 （Joseph Cambell） 的《千面英雄》（The Hero with a Thousand Faces）等著作影响，特别是其中的英雄旅程结构。在这个叙事框架下，电影体现了大量的原型神话元素和象征性情节。

然而，如果从埃德奥尔·格里桑（Édouard Glissant）的关系诗学角度来看，《星球大战》也可被解读为一个包含关系诗学元素的文本；值得从关系诗学的角度重新审视并揭示其跨文化的复杂关系网络和文化混合的力量。

《星球大战》系列电影中所展现的文化多样性、身份流动、跨文化的互动，以及不同种族和文化的交汇，展现了复杂的关系性网络。银河系的宇宙不只是科技和冒险的舞台，它也是一个关系性构建的空间，反映了当代社会中文化、权力与身份的流动与再造。因此，在被解读为英雄神话的经典文本的同时，它同样这为理解其更深层的社会、文化和情动维度提供了新的视角。

多样性与文化混合性

关系诗学中的多样性：格里桑的关系诗学强调多样性与文化混合性，主张通过不同文化的交汇与碰撞，打破同质化的文化形态，形成多元化的文化表达。在《星球大战》宇宙中，众多种族、文化和星球彼此交织，形成了一个复杂、多元的社会结构。无论是绝地武士的哲学、黑武士（Darth Vader）的道德挣扎，还是银河系中不同族群的共存与冲突，都是多元文化相互影响与混合的表现。

跨文化交流：不同星球和种族的文化在星际战争中交汇，形成了混合性和互联性，正如格里桑所描述的关系性。电影中的银河系不仅展示了科技、信仰、权力和哲学等不同方面的多样性，还通过角色之间的互动、联盟和敌对关系，表现了文化交融和关系性的动态过程。

流动性与身份的重构

身份的流动与多重性：关系诗学中的一个核心概念是身份不是固定的，而是在交互和关系中被不断重构。在《星球大战》系列中，许多角色的身份经历了复杂的转变和发展。比如安纳金·天行者（Anakin Skywalker）从绝地武士转变为黑武士的过程，卢克·天行者（Luke Skywalker）从无名少年变为银河英雄的旅程，都是在复杂的关系网络中构建和重构身份的体现。这种身份的流动性符合格里桑的关系诗学，即个体在复杂的文化和历史交汇中生成并演变。

跨越固定边界：电影中的银河帝国和反抗军代表着一种跨越固定边界的动态张力。帝国的专制象征着一种固定的秩序，而反抗军和绝地武士则代表了不断重构的关系网络，通过交互与抗争，试图打破这个僵化的秩序。

全球化与关系的宇宙

关系宇宙的构建：《星球大战》系列中的银河系本身可以看作是一个关系宇宙，不同文化、种族、星球间的相互作用与斗争，正是格里桑所讲的关系诗学中的动态交互。格里桑认为，世界不是由孤立的实体构成，而是通过复杂的关系网络形成整体。《星球大战》的叙事正是通过这种跨文化、跨种族的交互网络，展现了宇宙中不同力量的相互影响与冲突，形成了一个复杂而丰富的叙事空间。

宇宙多样性与反殖民解读：从关系诗学的角度，《星球大战》还可以被解读为一种反抗帝国霸权的叙事，类似于格里桑的后殖民思想。银河帝国象征着一种压迫性的、殖民式的统治，而反抗军则代表着多样性和解放的力量。通过这种对抗，电影中的关系性不断被重新定义，展现了格里桑所描述的文化间的复杂交互与抵抗。

语言、权力与情感交互

语言与文化的关系：关系诗学强调语言不仅是一种表达工具，还是文化交流与认同的重要载体。在《星球大战》中，不同星球、种族使用不同的语言或符号系统，这些语言的多样性成为了不同文化之间沟通与误解的象征。电影通过语言和符号展现了不同文明间的关系性，语言的使用也反映了权力和情感的互动，比如尤达大师（Yoda）的言语风格与智慧象征了某种文化传承的精髓。

情感与关系性：电影中的亲情、友情和师徒关系体现了情感在关系性中的核心地位。卢克与黑武士的父子关系、哈利森·福特（Han Solo）和莱娅公主（Princess Leia）的爱情等情感线索，都是通过关系网络展现个人和群体的情感复杂性。这种情感交互不仅塑造了个体的命运，还构成了电影情节发展的动力，符合关系诗学中情感交融与文化联系的主题。

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page