I have mixed reactions to this book.
First, the good points. McLaren resurrects emotions and gives them their due. Emotions are messages from our instinctive selves, she says. Hence the “language” reference in her title. Emotions flow through “Your every walking and sleeping moment,” adding that “They bring energy and information forward.” While more implied than not, emotions for her reflect Freud’s energy model, and his theory of the id. Energy is not just movement. It is directed movement. It’s loaded with inner meaning vis-a-vis the object-other, and it underlies our cognitive (conscious) approach to the world.
Given the importance of emotions, McLaren is excellent on the sad state of understanding when it comes to the question, “What is an emotion?” On this point, she writes: “This seems to be a very simple question, and yet psychologists, behaviorists, neurologists, evolutionary biologists, and sociologists cannot yet agree on a clear definition.” I don’t know why she inserted “yet” into that sentence. Emotions have been around forever. Emotion researchers have their own perspectives, but they vary across the board, to the point that it’s fair to say that there is a substantial incoherence on this topic.
In Western cultures, at least, it’s understandable that there’s a lack of discipline when it comes to understanding emotions. Emotions are highly disvalued vis-a-vis cognition and the near Stoic emphasis on managing emotions (i.e., denying their presence and role). McLaren’s emphasis in this book is empathy - which she defines as the ability to read the emotional states of others - and the following, long but excellent, quote indicates how culture buries this essential trait: “Though empathy is a normal human ability, most of us learn to shut it off or dampen it as we acquire verbal language. Most of us learn by the age of four or five, to hide, squelch, or camouflage our emotions in social situations. We catch on very quickly to the fact that most people are inauthentic with one another - that they lie about their feelings, leave important words unsaid, and trample unheedingly over each other’s obvious emotional cues. Learning to speak is often a process of learning not to speak the truth and attaining an uncanny level of pretense in most relationships. Every culture and subculture has a different set of unspoken rules about emotions, but all of them require that specific emotions be camouflaged, overused, or ignored. Most children - empaths one and all - eventually learn to shut down their empathic abilities in order to pilot their way through the social world.”
When it comes to her systematic formulation of a theory of emotions, though, there are problems. Her big concept is empathy, a relatively recently coined term that now seems overused as a catch-all word for a good emotion. Our ability to read emotions presumably means we will be sympathetic in addressing or being in tune with the other’s emotional state. I’d argue that that’s far from true. Given Darwinian variation, many are - it fits with Darwin’s tribalism theory - but many are not. McLaren argues that we’re all “empaths” until culture knocks it out of them, yet elsewhere she undercuts that point by stating that “some have very active mirror neurons,” suggesting that there’s an innate variation factor at work. Some have more capacity for empathy in her sense than others, but it’s even more likely that a good part of humanity is more self-oriented, id-driven beings who do not care all that much about someone else’s emotional state unless it directly affects their interests or they have to, instrumentally, feign interest and concern. Then there’s the flip side of the empathy piece that some theorists have noted: The ability to know what makes others tick is used to manipulate them, i.e. the opposite of a sympathetic reaction to the other’s emotional state. And then there’s Hume’s observation that we are approbation and disapprobation beings. We care about what others think as such relates to our self-interest and status within the group.
Hume’s observation bumps into a larger point about our emotional makeup. McLaren in the long quote above states that culture teaches us to mask our emotions, but she doesn’t explain why this would be the case. A good many - again, there’s Darwinian variety involved - are focused on their own self-interest, which includes being a group member in good standing. Yet they have these gnarly, id-driven tendencies that put them at odds with others and the group. So, of course they have to mask their emotions.
McLaren refers to emotions as reactive entities that are provoked. That’s correct of course, but it’s only one-half of the story. The larger question is why do we react as we do to provoking situations. This leads to the even broader problem with McLaren. While no doubt she’s put a lot of thought into this subject, there is still in my view the lack of a solid grounding for her theory of emotions. As biological beings, we are need-driven beings. We need nurture, security and sexual mates, that this inner state of need explains our emotional interactions with the world. We literally emote - move outward to get what we need from the world. We literally emote to ward off threats, harms to what we have or what we need, including our capacity (power) to seek and our power to resist threat or harm. In other words, we are provoked by +/- objects-others because of our needs and what we don’t want, and these emotion states prompt outgoing and defensive behaviors (her terminology often conflates motivating emotions with behavior that flows from such emotion states).
Seen this way, the fundamental emotional drivers are few - and somewhat follow Spinoza’s theory: In desire, we move outward to get what we need and desire not (sort of an “anti-desire”) what we don’t want (I’d say, this would be anger and fear to ward off threats and harm (McLaren makes a good point about defensive anger). When we are successful in our seeking and resisting, there is “joy,” and when not, there is sadness. These are broad conceptual categories that cover intensity states - degrees of joy, degrees of sadness - that McLaren also notes. Depending on how they are counted, the fundamental emotions come down to these five emotion states with all other emotion states and words being derivative.*
There are other factors that fit into this framework that are related to the role of cognition (are love/hate a cognitive evaluation of what we like or don’t like?); the “here-now” emotions versus dispositions and conscious choice based on underlying emotional values (again, Hume), and the role of cognitive sorting out of conflicting emotional states, including those that “should” override others.
“All emotions are true,” McLaren writes and we run into huge problems when we ignore them. This leads to her “empath practice and finding ways to channel the flow of emotions to get to a constructive result. It’s somewhat akin to Jung as far as I can tell - a rebalancing of the forces within - but to be honest, this part of McLaren’s book didn’t resonate, particularly her views on love not being an emotion, but, it is, rather, this: “Real love is a prayer and a deathless promise: an unwavering dedication to the soul of your loved one and to the soul of the world. Emotions and desires can come and go as they please, and circumstances can change in startling ways, but real love never wavers. Real love endures all emotions, and it survives trauma, betrayal, divorce, and even death.”
*Reorganized in this way, there’s some overlap with McLaren’s conceptual scheme, though because of her views of emotions as reactive, she doesn’t deal with outward actions based on need (desire [Spinoza], “pain” [Schopenhauer]), though arguably envy bumps into desire. Anger-fear are defensive (anti-desire) emotions, and stress and resistance are variations of these; jealousy is a subset of anger, and panic and terror are subsets of fear. Of course, happiness, contentment, joy are all variations on successful interactions; grief, depression, and sadness are all variations on unsuccessful interactions. I would add, though, that there’s an important distinction here between the initiating emotion of desire from the end state emotions of joy and sadness, with joy resulting in the quieting of energy, and sadness leading to the festering of frustrating or fear-based energy because seeking or resisting actions have not been successful. Boredom and apathy are special cases of emotions - what happens when one lives in comfort, and there’s too much free energy that separates the self from the inherent meaning when one is focused on survival and basic well-being.