In this scientific talk I shall address a marginal topic in Luhmann’s work: that of emotions. Several authors have criticised not only the secondary role emotions play in Luhmann’s theory, but also his out of date (and flawed) description of emotions, since they are undifferentiated visceral activations of the organic system and processed latter by the psychic system (and latter by the social system), or they are collapsed in the symbiotic mechanisms that coordinate the relation between human bodies and social systems. My aim here is to review some elements established in the scientific literature of emotions, so we can go beyond the vague and narrow description of emotions present in Luhmann’s account, although I shall be faithful to his broader theoretical commitments. My proposal is that emotions can be understood as an instance of structural coupling among organic, psychic and social systems. Specifically, I maintain that emotions represent a threshold domain in which the normative expectations of social systems are bundled together with states of consciousness, in the form of beliefs that affirm individuals are entitled to have the right emotion in some interaction system, and the consequent bodily processes. To advance my proposal, I will focus on some of emotions and their relation to moral and legal norms. I will also tackle one of the most important body substrata of emotions: the human face.

1. Seminar
Niklas Luhmann: 30 años de Sistemas
Sociales
Luhmann and the Sociology
of Emotions
Mauricio Salgado
PhD
m.salgado@unab.c
l
Santiago – November 2014

2. Luhmann’s Social Systems
Is Luhmann’s systems theory alexithymic?
Alexithymia describes a series of psycho-behavioural characteristics that are
expressed in the etymology of the word itself: from the Greek a- (lack), lexis-
(word) and thymos- (mood, feeling or emotion), alexithymia means literally
“without words for emotions”. The main characteristics of alexithymia can be
summarized (…) as: difficulty in identifying and describing feelings; difficulty
in distinguishing between feelings and the bodily sensations of emotional
arousal (…); constricted imaginative processes (…); and an externally
oriented cognitive style.
2

3. This Presentation
3
My main point
There are two different thesis in Luhmann’s account of emotions
a. Emotions are tied to expectations  Uncontroversial and partially correct
b. Emotions are homogeneous and internal to psychic life  Controversial and
flawed
Emotions threshold phenomena among cognition, society and biology: Co-evolution
From cognitive to social systems: Beliefs  Emotions  Action
From social to organic systems: Social evolution  Emotions  Facial
expression

4. Emotions in Social Systems
4

5. Emotions in Social Systems
Emotions represent “a sphere of problems that until now have proved quite
difficult for sociology” (1995, p. 274)
5

6. Emotions in Social Systems
1. Emotions are understood in the process of adaptation to fulfilment or
disappointment of claims by the psychic system
2. Claims are a sub-category of expectation, the former being the form in which a
system brings the indeterminable environment into a form that can be used
operatively
3. A claim is a condensed form of expectation in which self-commitment is increased,
and with it vulnerability
4. Emotions function as immune system: Emotions are concerned with grasping-as-signal
the noise that would otherwise disrupt the ongoing operations of the psychic
system
6
First (uncontroversial) thesis: Emotions are tied to expectations
First corollary: Emotions are tied to second order expectations
In some system of interaction X, when disappointment happens, Alter is entitled by
Ego to experience the right emotion A (and not other emotion)

7. Emotions in Social Systems
Second (controversial) thesis: Emotions are unitary and internal
activations
1. “Emotions are not representations that refer to the environment but internal
adaptations to internal problem situations in the psychic system that concern the
ongoing production of the system’s elements by the system’s elements” (1995, p.
274)
2. Only the cognitive system draws the meaningful distinctions that supposedly give
rise to or individuate particular emotions in their specificity
3. “The well-known variety of distinct emotions comes about only secondarily, only
through cognitive and linguistic interpretation” (1995, p. 275)
7
Second (flawed) corollary: Emotions are, fundamentally, all the
Isnasmomee system of interaction X, when disappointment happens, emotions as different
as joy and rage are in fact identical but for different appraisals laid on the same
arousal
Third (flawed) corollary: Emotions are epiphenomenal
Emotions are residual, accidental elements in the social order

8. Emotions are not homogeneous
Anger, Cartesian indignation, guilt, resentment, gratitude
8
Emotions can be triggered by beliefs about actions
Emotions can be triggered by beliefs about character
Hatred, contempt, shame
Emotions can be based on interactions
Anger, resentment
Emotions can be based on comparisons
Envy

9. Emotions are not homogeneous
Hypothesis
1. Core disgust and socio-moral disgust elicit different emotions
2. Time as well as gender are likely to differentially affect their intensity (via a
greater reliance of socio-moral disgust on cognitive appraisal)
Experimental Procedure
Participants were shown photographs of core and socio-moral disgust elicitors and
asked to provide a wide ranging rating of their emotional response to each at 3
time points
Results
• Each elicitor generated a significantly different emotional response.
• The disgust response to core elicitors weakened over time whereas socio-moral
responses intensified.
• Males and females showed similar levels of disgust to socio-moral elicitors, but
females showed higher levels to core elicitors.
9
Is Disgust a Homogeneous Emotion? (Simpson et al.,
2006, M&E)

10. COGNITION SOCIETY
EMOTIONS
BIOLOGY
10
Emotions as Structural Coupling
Beliefs  Emotions  Action
Social
Evolution
 Emotions  Facial
Features

11. From Cognitive to Social Systems
11

12. Emotions and Social Action
Beliefs can generate emotions that have consequences for
behaviour
12
Beliefs  Emotions  Action
[ Ego ]
[ Alter ]

13. Emotions and Social Action
13
Claim that I have to be treated fairly
[ Alter ] [ Ego ]
Ego’s Belief:
Anger
Alter imposed an unjust harm on Ego
Ego’s Emotion:
Ego feels anger towards Alter
Ego’s Action Tendency:
Cause the object of the emotion to
suffer

14. Emotions and Social Action
Cartesian Indignation
14
Claim that others have to be treated fairly
[ Alter ] [ Ego ]
Witness’ Belief:
Alter imposed an unjust harm on Ego
in the presence of some witness
Witness’ Emotion:
Witness feels ‘Cartesian indignation’
towards Alter
Witness’ Action Tendency:
Cause the object of the emotion to
suffer
[ Witness ]

15. Emotions and Social Action
15
Claim that others have to be treated fairly
[ Ego ]
Ego’s Belief:
Pity
Alter has suffered unmerited distress
Ego’s Emotion:
Ego feels pity towards Alter
Ego’s Action Tendency:
Console or alleviate the distress of
Alter
[ Alter ]

16. Emotions and Social Action
16
Claim that we have to comply with some obligation or standard
[ Alter ]
[ Ego ]
Ego’s Belief:
Alter has violated some moral
boundary
Ego’s Emotion:
Ego feels disgust towards Alter
Ego’s Action Tendency:
Ostracised; avoid
Disgust

17. Emotions and Social Action
17
Claim that we have to comply with some obligation or standard
[ Alter ]
[ Ego ]
Ego’s Belief:
Alter is weak or inferior
Ego’s Emotion:
Ego feels contempt towards Alter
Ego’s Action Tendency:
Ostracised; avoid
Contempt

18. Emotions and Social Action
18
Claim that we have to comply with some obligation or standard
[ Alter ]
[ Ego ]
Alter’s Belief:
Shame
Ego feels contempt towards Alter
Alter’s Emotion:
Alter feels shame
Alter’s Action Tendency:
Run away; disappear; commit suicide

19. Emotions and Social Action
19
Claim that we have to comply with some obligation or standard
[ Alter ]
[ Ego ]
Alter’s Belief:
Guilt
Alter has behaved unjustly or
immorally
Alter’s Emotion:
Alter feels guilt
Alter’s Action Tendency:
Confess; make repairs; hurt oneself

20. Emotions and Norms
20
Emotions can generate proto-rights
Ego
Alter
Good Wrong
Guilt
Shame
Self-humiliation
Contempt
Disgust
Cartesian indignation
Forgiveness
Satisfaction
Pride
Contentment
Gratitude
Recognition
Cartesian love

21. Emotions and Contingency
21

22. Emotions and Contingency
22
Axiom: In the social world, everything is neither necessary nor
impossible
“Every complex state of affairs is based on a selection of relations among its
elements, which it uses to constitute and maintain itself. The selection
positions and qualifies the elements, although other relations would have
been possible. We borrow the tradition-laden term ‘contingency’ to designate
this ‘also being possible otherwise’. It alludes, too, to the possibility of failing
to achieve the best possible formation”
Niklas Luhmann, Social Sistems, p. 25

23. Emotions and Contingency
23
First corollary: Emotions are tied to second order expectations
In some system of interaction X, when disappointment happens, Alter is entitled by
Ego to experience the right emotion A (and not other emotion)
Restriction
Since second order expectations can also be disappointed, then the First corollary has
to be qualified. Thus,
First corollary (qualified): Emotions are tied to second order
expectations
In some system of interaction X, when disappointment happens, despite Alter being
entitled by Ego to experience the right emotion A, Alter can indeed experience a
different emotion or no emotion at all.

24. 24

25. 25

26. 26

27. Emotions and Contingency
27
Social factors that might erode or qualify emotional responses
1. Childhood emotional neglect or maltreatment
2. Obedience to authority
3. Ideology
4. Different moral intuitions / foundations: Harm, Fairness, Ingroup, Authority, Purity
5. In-group / out-group relationships – Parochial Altruism
Biological factors that might erode emotional responses
1. Psychopaths: Low affective empathy
2. Autism: Low cognitive empathy
3. Genes, hormones, brain damage

28. Emotions and Contingency
28
Meta-emotions (disappointments of disappointments):
Awkwardness
• Infidelity: Feeling pride instead of shame or regret
• Institutional cruelty against others: Feeling satisfaction or no emotion instead of pity
or Cartesian indignation
Emotional Divergences and Social Conflict
• Intimacy: Satisfaction vs. Envy
• Same sex-marriage: Contempt vs. Recognition
• Authenticity: Communicate the right emotion

29. From Social to Organic Systems
29

30. 30
Faces and Emotions
Ashamed Angry
Jealous Thankful

31. Faces and Emotions
31
High variance among facial features in humans
1. Faces evolved in favor of helping us distinguish among individuals
2. Stretches of DNA associated with facial features are more diverse than the overall
genome
3. Evidence of selective pressure at the genetic level
Gene-Culture Co-evolution
1. Social cognition: an ability to distinguish identity and glean information from faces
2. Facial features very important in person perception – Salient in first impressions
3. People automatically evaluate faces on trait dimensions: Righteousness and
Dominance
4. Social evolution may have changed the very shape of our faces

32. Faces and Emotions
32
“(…) an affect like shame recruits the sensitivities of a face
engorged with the blood of a blush. The face of the human
being, as Darwin (1872) made clear, is a hyper-sensitive and
finely muscled surface, developed through evolution and
recruited to the task of the experience and expression of
affects.”
Stenner 2004, p. 170

33. Concluding Remarks
33

34. Concluding Remarks
34
My main point
There are two different thesis in Luhmann’s account of emotions
a. Emotions are tied to expectations
b. Emotions are homogeneous and internal to psychic life
Regarding the second thesis, Luhmann’s sociology is alexithymic. What is
the treatment to this theoretical condition? Put the second thesis in the
garbage bin!
This allows Luhmann’s theory to be in contact with the best available science
of emotions
What does Luhmann’s sociology of emotions has to say about ‘positive
emotions’ (gratitude, satisfaction, pride)?

35. Seminar
Niklas Luhmann: 30 años de Sistemas
Sociales
Luhmann and the Sociology
of Emotions
Mauricio Salgado
PhD
m.salgado@unab.c
l
Santiago – November 2014