Essay: A sporadic, innate culture
A sporadic, innate and inherent social life did not produce a culture that was identically sporadic, inherent and innate. Therefore, the entire culture that contributed to the “irrational” processes that led the development of the initiative was not the product of an innate, inherent and spontaneous social life. Instead, the development of culture that influenced and produced these “irrational” processes resulted from a collaboration between the individual and collective identities of the social initiative’s participants.
Swidler asserts a comprehensive distinction between culture and emotion. Conflicts and the weighting of “social status and organizational roles,” as assumed by Swidler, are influenced by the context of emotions instead of the concept of culture. However, Swidler must acknowledge the cultural implications that direct emotional responses. Although, emotions are innate and inherent, an affect of cultural influences is the manner in which emotions interpret and guide perceptions of “social status and organizational roles.” A related debate may discern whether culture developed first or whether emotions developed first. Yet, at birth, the individual is almost entirely absent of cultural influences while human senses are isolated and inherent traits that influence the construction of emotions. Even as each individual is designated emotions that are inherent and initially isolated, culture is determined by the collective emotional responses of several individuals’ raw and inherent senses or emotions. Therefore, the culture that initiated the aforementioned “irrational processes” were eliciting behaviors, attitudes, actions and assumptions based on the contribution of culturally influenced emotional responses.