I smell a Coleridge coming on.
Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>His dissertation begins with a focus on what feeling is for Bradey (not
>feelings), both what it is and what it isn't. Emotions is one of the
>things it isn't.
>On 10/20/2013 5:51 PM, P wrote:
>> T&TIT is sensitive to the difference between the two words.
>> "Rickard A. Parker" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Thank you Tom for a terrific post.
>>> I had been confused about Eliot's usage of
>>> "emotions" and "feelings" in his essays. Maybe his
>>> audience was in tune with him from a standard
>>> usage at the time but I wasn't aware of a
>>> difference. I don't recall Eliot defining the
>>> terms either. I finally came up with something
>>> close to what you reported on with emotions being
>>> the ancient animal-like part and feelings being
>>> when the intellect got involved. As I remember
>>> though Eliot wasn't consistent with the usage and
>>> it appears to me that your author wasn't either.
>>> Thanks also for taking the time to do the scans.
>>> Rick Parker