E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 8, 2023

Generation of Common Emotions Based on Common Senses
Through the Activities in Which Each Exposes One’s Body One
Another: Assumptions and Foundations Required to Continue
the Conversation
Chiharu FUJII
Waseda University
Abstract
The "I" is a collection of diverse "selves." "Ego identity" is individually stable in the harmonious unityof the diverse "self". This stability is based on trust in the commonality with the "self" of others andthe acceptance of the "self" of others that is different from mine. It is formed through the sharing ofemotions based on common senses through activities to share time and space by exposing each bodywith others.
Key words: Online, Exposure, Emotion, Others, Personality

University faculty meetings have already been held online, as the pandemic
continues for a long time. It seems to me that our faculty assemblies have been reduced
their functions for discussion. If there is any doubt about the proposal of the executive orpresident, in the case of face-to-face meeting, you could whisper very briefly the facultymember sitting next to, such as "This would be a problem, isn't it?" and if this fellow
agree with it, you could raise your hand and express your doubts. In online faculty
meetings, it seems that there are fewer doubts and objections than face-to-face meetings.
I am afraid of the deterioration of its function as a place where diverse voices areexchanged.
On the other hand, some professors have pointed out the effect of online classes on
Correspondence:
Chiharu Fujii, Waseda University. Email: chiharu-f@ca.em-net.ne.jp

Generation of Common Emotions Based on Common Senses Through the Activities in Which Each
59
Exposes One’s Body One Another: Assumptions and Foundations Required to Continue theConversation

learning. Certainly, it may be more effective than collective or face-to-face lectures, interms of understanding of information within certain definitive limit. However, should
the significance of university lectures and seminars be restricted to understanding thecontent of the lectures?
For example, let's say a student finds another student in the classroom who is very
attractive. And suppose, the other day, they happen to be at the same table at the lunch
cafeteria and are aware of each other's existence. Moreover, suppose, a few days later,
they got together at yet another gathering. While such encounters are repeated, they
gradually become aware of each other's existence, and at one point a conversation begins.
At last, they become friends. Then they will discover commonalities in interests andhobbies, such as fashion or music, and share a common sense and common emotions
based on them. On such the accumulation of accidental contact, a connection as "us" isborn.
It may be difficult for students to develop such connections through online lectures.
It begins with an accidental encounter that somehow expose one another, to becomefriends and expand connections. On the online exercise, it may not be guaranteed todevelop the relationship with the person who made the anxious remark. without having
a place to meet face-to-face afterwards, they could not make a connection as a friend.
Online encounters are less effective in broadening students' connections unless they are
made up for by subsequent face-to-face interactions. The significance of online isextremely limited to provide students to the development of subsequent relationships.
It is necessary for us to recognize that online makes the virtual the illusion of reality.
There is a danger through online encounters, that, although we know only a part of theother person, we fall into mistaken belief that we understand the personality of the person
as a whole. In the same way, we can participate in online encounter as only one aspect ofus. In other words, everyone can participate in online without exposing one’s own entire
personality. The participants can approach anonymous from the safe zone where
guarantees them of withdrawing at any time.
On the other hand, it is guarantees through the collective and face-to-face encounters,
in which participants share time and space with exposing each other's bodies, that we find
one another pluralistic and multifaceted attributes of each person without restriction, even
if the theme is limited to specific one. Attributes of others which attract me can beperceived as a presence. They are caught by the antennae of my own interest, rather thanbeing discovered intentionally. "Coincidental encounters" are guided by such a system.
It is an opportunity for the development of new human relationships to have interests inE-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 8, 2023

60C. Fujii

other persons that arises from the sharing of activities with exposing each body. In thisway, human relationships expand, and the relationship between oneself and the world
develops in a pluralistic and multifaceted manner.
Therefore, although online lectures are effective in transmitting the content oflectures, they have a weak function of expanding the world further for students. It is rather
taking such opportunities away. Similarly, while online meeting is effective intransmitting and sharing information and we can use time efficiently, it reduces thefunction of making a check on the agenda. Even faculty members who are dozing off orworking inside in the faculty meeting are sensitive to a voice from a colleague thatquestions or asks for statement. In online meetings, this kind of movement is less likely
to occur. Nor can they sense how the remarks resonate with other participants. Murmurs
and facial expressions cannot be mutually matched. It is not possible for online
participants to create an "atmosphere of place" that calls for discussion.
Online passing and flaming up frequently occur. In addition, on the Internet, it issaid that opinions on controversial themes tend to be radicalized and divide into two sides
in a confrontational manner.
I would like to start a discussion on this problem with Dewey’s saying that action
manifests and forms the self (Ethics, 1932, in Later Works, Vol. 7, p.296). For Dewey, theself, like the mind, is not an entity innately possessed by the person. As G. H. Mead says,
it is a function that has been formed after birth through interaction with others around us.
And the mode of interaction is based on a culture shared by the members of thecommunity. The "self" is basically formed through acting in accordance with the behaviorof the members of the community in which one is born.
However, if the "self" is formed only in this process, then all members of thecommunity will act in the same way in every situation, and the members of the samecommunity will show only a common "self." In such a case, the individuality of the "self"
is not so conscious, and the individuality (personality) is rarely appeared. We must
assume that the individual is composed of multiple "selves." Each person shows hisown individuality as an each own unique set of selves. The sets are diverse, soindividuality appears different. Also, as we grow, the roles of each within the community
become differentiated. Each of us also joins other diverse groups as a member. In thecontext of actions in the group, one must manifest the "self" appropriate for the role
expected in the group. And "individuality" is shown in the way of function that unifies
multiple "selves". "I" is the function unifying the plurality of "selves" that make up aperson. "Identity" is established when “I” functions to unify such “selves” in a stable andThematic Research: Corporeality and Education: Reconsidering the Basis of “Experience” and “Connection”

Generation of Common Emotions Based on Common Senses Through the Activities in Which Each
61
Exposes One’s Body One Another: Assumptions and Foundations Required to Continue theConversation

harmonious.
Further, in this regard, I would like to use Dewey's essay on Ethics as a clue.
According to Dewey, moral theory emerges “when men are confronted withsituations in which different desires promise opposed goods, and in which incompatible
courses of action seem to be morally justified" (ibid., in LW7, p.164). As is often the case,between family life and business life, it is a case when "moral standards which apply in
one do not hold in the other" (ibid., p.164). That is, it is the situation in which “he is torn
between two duties" (ibid., p.165). Based on this argument, for Dewey, the moral
problem stems from the conflict between multiple "selves" over the determination ofbehavior.
In my essay "’Continuing Conversation’, and Being an Interpreter Beyond‘Incommensurability’” in Studies in The Philosophy of Education (No. 124, 2021), I
discussed the plurality of the "self" in a person and the necessity of the harmonious andsable function of unifying “selves”. And I also proposed the necessity of securing
interpreters in our community, who are members within "our" group and on the other
hand partially possess the "self" in common with other communities which cannot bereciprocated. Such members have ability to open up his community to treating "them" as"you." Even "we" are made up of the commonality of members, “I” of each member”
made up of diverse "selves." Every community is based on the commonality of a
specific "self" among the various "selves" of each member. In this regard, even though“they” are antagonistically opposed to “us” on a particular subject, the antagonistic "self"
is only one of the diverse "selves" of the antagonists, and much of the other "selves” ofthem are potentially common to both. The others who disagree over a particular theme
are not "them" who cannot be reciprocal at all, but "you" with whom we share manykinds of "self" potentially.
However, when speech exchanges in the Internet space, the "self" of each participant
is limited in its expression to the "self" related to the specified theme. In the Internet space,along with anonymity, the expression of mutual "self" is limited to opposing ones,
making it difficult to feel the "self" of the other that is potentially shared with me. In
addition, it becomes difficult for each to read mutually what kind of diverse "self"
constitutes the other person as "you". As a result, conflicts incline to be intensified andthe distribution of opinions is divided into two poles.
How can participants "continue the conversation" around a controversial topic
without being limited to each “self” opposed to each other?

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 8, 2023

62C. Fujii

There is an interesting and prospective project.
It is “the public conversation project” developed as a method for family therapy inpsychiatry. It has been introduced in Kenneth J. Gergen and Melia Gergen, Social
Construction: Entering the Dialogue (Taos institute Publications, 2004). The projectfocuses on conflicting issues between people, such as abortion. In the project, theparticipants will proceed with the following conversation.
① The participants keep their positions hidden on the theme, and care not to reveal
each position while taking. They introduced each other with having dinner together
in a relaxed atmosphere.
② In the subsequent discussion on the theme, they talk about their arguments basedon their own personal experiences and emotions about them.
In this way, as in ①, physical activities are performed together so that mutualsituations are shared and sensations of pleasure can be obtained in the same way throughthe each own sense organs. In other words, a common experience is constructed. In theactivity, participants express their pleasure, such as "Delicious!" and other participants
respond with words that affirm it, such as "So do I!". In this way, the commonality ofexperiences, sensations, and emotions is confirmed. Based on the common sense sharedby each other, the common emotions shared by each other are confirmed. The sharedemotions about the shared experience give a stable base of mutual trust. Then, forexample, they talk about their own experiences with each other, such as family, hobbies,
and hometown, and deepen mutual understanding and acceptance of each other. In thisway, it is achieved mutually that “self” of mine is disclosed and "self" of yours is accepted.
Thus, mutual connection as "we" are brought into. The participants are possible to be
conscious mutually that they are interconnected together pluralistically and multifaceted.
By conducting activities in which common emotions are generated among
participants based on common senses. And with confirming common emotions among
participants, a sense of trust is fostered, which inspire courage in telling my own
experiences and in accepting such stories of others. In addition, those senses take adefinite form of the ability to use what the other person says as a clue, the thoughtfulness
necessary to imagine the other person's experience and the emotions, and the inclusive
attitude towards the other person. In this way, the foundation is prepared for collaborative
exploration towards the construction of an optimal solution on confrontational problems,
which that both sides can "agree on" or, at least, treat the other as "you". And it ispossible to keep "continuing the conversation".
The efficiency of Online lecture is limited to transmit a certain specific information
Thematic Research: Corporeality and Education: Reconsidering the Basis of “Experience” and “Connection”

Generation of Common Emotions Based on Common Senses Through the Activities in Which Each63Exposes One’s Body One Another: Assumptions and Foundations Required to Continue theConversation

to students. It is required for Online lectures, when fruitful discussion is expected, to havepreviously accumulated face-to-face communication between students or to be arranged
subsequently development of face-to-face communication. In the expression of opinions
on the Internet, only a specific and limited "self" of sender is emphasized, though thesender has various "selves". For this reason, the receiver accepts only a specific andlimited “self" as the sender, while the receiver is made aware of a specific and limited“self” as the receiver around the issue. Therefore, even if a receiver agrees with sender,
the receiver is strongly aware of the "self" as the consenting party. On the contrary, whena receiver disagrees, the statements of the opponent are strongly aware of the denial or
attack on the "self" of the receiver. The specific and limited "self" of each side are
separated in parallel from the other diverse "selves". And only that "self" of each is
mistaken as all the "I" of the each. As a result, the two sides become polarized and theconfrontation escalates.
By exposing body together in shared activities in temporal and spatial, it is possible
to share sensory given. Even when one encounters others who have "self" different fromone’s on a specific theme, it is possible for participants to avoid escalation to conflict,division, and exclusion. The way to start and continue a "conversation" is opened to on
the mutual recognition, that even though the "self" of the other’s related to the theme isdifferent from mine is merely one "self" among the various "selves" of the person, and sois the "self" of mine related to the theme. We must rely on the confidence that we have
many other "selves" in common, and that we can connect each other as "we".
What countermeasure can education prepare? What do educators have to do?
The first is to make children immerse themselves in activity which stimulate theirfive senses and give them pleasant excitation from the five organs. It is an activity that
promotes children to confirm common emotions based on their common senses. By
sharing these activities, and by reflecting on their realizations of their emotions that ismutually confirmed and shared, children can feel certain that they are interconnected"selves," or "we." In other words, one of the central functions of teachers in classwork is
to set up such experiences for children and create common emotions into children
through the activity. And the teacher helps children verbalize those sensations and enjoy
understanding them each other. The experience of confirming common emotions withothers is the first step in the attempt on understanding others who live in a "self" that isdifferent from the "self" of mine. This is the foundation for “to continue continuation”.
Second, as discussed in my essay (2021), elders (teachers) are required to accept

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 8, 2023

64

C. Fujii

their role of "interpreter" of a child to the other children, close beside the child in an
empathetic attitude to the minority "self" of the child. In my earlier essay, I explained suchthe role, with using Gergen's metaphor for the therapist's attitude of "engage in a subtle
and complex dance of coaction" (K. J.Gergen, Relational Being, 2009, Oxford Univ., p.
282). That is, the therapist tries to enter the world of the story that the client lives andaccept the words, vocabulary, and metaphors that the client uses. By having thetherapist dance with the client to the melody of "self" of the client, then it is possible forthe client to be invited to try dancing to other melodies, i.e., "into the alternative world".
Similarly, by having the teacher dance with the child to the melody of the "self" of thechild, the child will be able to accept the "self" as a minority in a positive light and live aharmonious connection with the other "selves" of the child. In this way, the diverse "self"is harmoniously unified as “I”. In consequence, a stable and unique "ego identity" isestablished. In addition, in such a pluralistic and multifaceted connection within “selves”
of mine, we can make relation with diverse others, which consists in a pluralistic andmultifaceted "we".
The "I" is a collection of diverse "selves”, and the "ego identity" is individuallystable in its harmonious unity. In addition, this stability of harmonious unity is based on
the feeling that “I” am tied together with others who have the "self" in common withmine. In addition, it is possible on the stability of harmonious unity of "ego identity" tounderstand and accept of the "self" of others different from mine. In conclusion, it isnecessary to provide an opportunity to expose each other's bodies through gathering andface-to-face, and to confirm the shared "self" mutually through common activities among
participants, in which common sensory perceptions occur and exchange. Thus, commonemotion is generated and shared among them. The unique stability of the "ego identity",in which multiple "selves" are harmoniously unified, maintains the sense of reliance on
the ties with others who are each composed of diverse "self". This is a social foundation
for mutual understanding and acceptance.

Thematic Research: Corporeality and Education: Reconsidering the Basis of “Experience” and “Connection”