To this end, we take validated word lists for emotion and reason and construct the poles as the average vectors for these semantically coherent word groups. Our goal is to construct a dimension in this space corresponding to reason at one pole and emotion on the other. The algorithm for this purpose, word embedding, transforms words and phrases to vectors, where similar words tend to co-locate and directions in the space (dimensions) correspond to semantically meaningful concepts (Collobert and Weston, 2008 Mikolov et al., 2013 Pennington et al., 2014). Our approach builds on recently developed computational linguistics tools, which represent semantic dimensions in language as geometric dimensions in a vector space. Congress have used emotion in their rhetoric over the last 150 years. We then use it for a variegated description of how politicians in U.S. In this paper, we propose a measure that satisfies these requirements, and we extensively validate it against human judgement. Providing empirical evidence on these questions has been difficult due to the lack of a reproducible, validated and scalable measure of emotionality in political language. The extent to which politicians engage with this trade-off, and what institutional, political and psychological factors underlie their choices, is largely unknown. In the day-to-day of political debate, politicians resort to a mix of emotion and reason and search for the right balance between these two elements. Cultivated by these early ideas, the classic dichotomy between emotions and affect ( pathos) on the one side and rationality and cognition ( logos) on the other has informed all realms of social sciences, from social psychology (LeDoux, 1998), to political philosophy (Elster, 1999), to economics (Frank, 1988). In his treatise on Rhetoric, Aristotle suggested that persuasion can be achieved through either logical argumentation or emotional arousal in the audience success depends on selecting the most appropriate strategy for the given context. (Drew Westen, The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation (2007), pg. In politics, when reason and emotion collide, emotion invariably wins. (Aristotle, Rhetoric (350 B.C.E), chapter 7. An emotional speaker always makes his audience feel with him, even when there is nothing in his arguments which is why many speakers try to overwhelm their audience by mere noise.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |