> Peter Montgomery wrote:
> Seems to me that the context Eliot was using in his famous
> dissociation quote
> was of a whole culture, rather than an individual case. Surely on a
> cultural scale it
> is a different phenomenon.

I don't know the background Nancy does, but on the face of it Eliot was
using a psychological term (with its meaning for him in psychologyP to
describe one or both of two things:

a) whole cultures

b) the cultural _causes_ of a psychological trait

The term is a slippery one, which is perhaps one of the reasons it
disappeard from psychology.

Eliot, like James (H) and Wordsworth and Pope before him was prettty 
clearly trying to "make room" for his own poetrty. In that he was rather
successful -- too successful in that he produced a number of oracular
saying about literature, history, and culture which are mostly pompous
nonsense and kept too many critics & scholars too long preoccupied with
makign sense of rather empty formulations. If I recall corrctly Eliot
himself commented a few times on his unfortunate ability to coin terms
that caught on too well. "Dissociation of sensibility" as a hisstorical
analysis (in fact, "sensibility" however defined) was one such
wild-goose chase.