Hah, thanks. So one cannot use the word to reference their own “subjective feeling” but can use it to reference others’?
(Sidenote: If you’re right, I guess most of its usage here is incorrect, and perhaps misleading, but it seems like we’d be wrong in an silly, pedantic, “what silly rules for word” sort of way. We’d still be wrong though.)
I think the idea is that affect is the outward appearance of a feeling or emotion or whatever. You could tell what your own affects are, but you’d have to look in a mirror or something.
Hah, thanks. So one cannot use the word to reference their own “subjective feeling” but can use it to reference others’?
(Sidenote: If you’re right, I guess most of its usage here is incorrect, and perhaps misleading, but it seems like we’d be wrong in an silly, pedantic, “what silly rules for word” sort of way. We’d still be wrong though.)
I think the idea is that affect is the outward appearance of a feeling or emotion or whatever. You could tell what your own affects are, but you’d have to look in a mirror or something.
You can feel sad, but affect happiness*, and appear to others as displaying a highly positive affect**.
* non-scientific usage
** scientific usage
You can feel sad, but signal happiness, and appear to others as displaying a highly positive affect.
Ok, so how would one signal happiness?