The Pandemic Atmos-Fear
Abstract
Abstract. Psychology has been challenged by its own terminological limitations, in which phenomena of large-scale, field-like kind force us to innovate with our theoretical tools. Phenomena with global impacts – epidemics, pandemics, famines, and the like – remain on the periphery of psychology’s theoretical efforts. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 is no different. Like previous pandemics, it reveals the difficulty of dealing with phenomena on a global scale and understanding the inherent organization of the cloud-like phenomena. Psychological research has mainly focused on individual traumatic experiences, impacts, and consequences. Less attention has been paid to how people in different societies make meaning of these changes in everyday life. Psychologically, people want to control the pandemic, while in reality we simply escape from it. All of the measures instituted in response to it are escape-oriented, not glorious accounts of winning a war on the invisible enemy. Theoretically, we learn from the current experience the relevance of how humans escalate and circumvent the proliferation of the panic of fear through building and demolishing borders in mind and society. We all are living in a sort of atmos-fear, a culturally cultivated state of affective limbo that is easy to trigger and difficult to modulate. How do human beings deal with this core issue of feeling safe/unsafe, and how does it affect individual and collective conduct? This paper attempts to demonstrate how the COVID-19 example can theoretically illuminate new perspectives of international psychology that will become increasingly more crucial in a future where global events are likely to recur.
Impact and Implications.
Understanding how individuals and collective make sense of unexpected is related to the achievement of SDG No. 3 “Good health and wellbeing”; SDG No. 4 “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”; and SDG No. 10 “Reducing inequalities.” Overcomes trauma-focused understanding of COVID-19 to develop human meaning-making theory of global catastrophic events.
References
(2013). From the brink of the apocalypse: Confronting famine, war, plague and death in the later middle ages. Routledge.
(1996). Bubonic plague in nineteenth-century China. Stanford University Press.
(2021). New frontiers for International Perspectives in Psychology: Building forward better. International Perspectives in Psychology, 10(1), 1–2. 10.1027/2157-3891/a000006
(Eds.). (2021). Global pandemics and epistemic crises in psychology: A socio-philosophical approach. Routledge.
(2021). The impact of Covid-19 pandemic: Psycho-social perception of the crisis and sense-making processes. Community Psychology in Global Perspective, 7(2), 103–128. 10.1285/i24212113v7i2p103
(2008). Rationality of mortals: How people cope with uncertainty. Oxford University Press.
(2020). Who is left behind? Altruism of giving, happiness and mental health during the Covid-19 period in the UK. Applied Research Quality Life, 17(1), 251–276. 10.1007/s11482-020-09900-8
(2022). COVID-19: Another look at solidarity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 31(2), 256–262. 10.1017/S0963180120001115
(2009). Three. The great plague pandemic. In The burdens of disease (pp. 37–61). Rutgers University Press. 10.36019/9780813548173-006
(1998). How does autodialogue work? Miracles of meaning maintenance and circumvention strategies. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(1), 68–82. 10.2307/2787058
(2004). On our way: The final passage through life and death. University of California Press.
(2015). Mediating panic: The iconography of ‘new’ infectious threats, 1936–2009. In R. Peckham (Ed.), Empires of panic: Epidemics and colonial anxieties (pp. 181–202). Hong Kong University Press.
(2020). COVID-19—A social phenomenon requiring diverse expertise. Institute of Development Studies. https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinions/covid-19-a-social-phenomenon-requiring-diverse-expertise/
(2020). Corona, climate, chronic emergency: War communism in the twenty-first century. Verso Books.
(2016). The borderland. Culture & Psychology, 22(2), 206–215. 10.1177/1354067X15601199
(2017). Borders, tensegrity and development in dialogue. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Sciences, 51(4), 536–556. 10.1007/s12124-017-9398-2
(1978). Illness as metaphor. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
(2004). International psychology: An overview. In M. J. StevensD. Wedding (Eds.), Handbook of international psychology (p. 123). Brunner-Routledge.
(2019). “Atmos-fear”: A psycho-semiotic analysis of messages in New York everyday life. Semiotica, 2019(226), 169–184. 10.1515/sem-2017-0101
(2021a). Atmos-fear and semiotic devices: How to turn the right to healthcare into a war. In M. DegeI. Strasser (Eds.), Global pandemics and epistemic crises in psychology: A socio-philosophical approach (pp. 128–149). Routledge.
(2021b). Face masks as layers of meaning in times of COVID-19. Culture & Psychology, 27(1), 131–151. 10.1177/1354067X20957549
(2020). Listen to us, grown-ups! A research on children’s diaries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Formazione & Insegnamento. European Journal of Research on Education and Teaching, 18(3), 89–100. 10.7346/-fei-XVIII-03-20_07
(2021). The creative synthesis and the global psychology. Human Arenas, 4(1), 1–4. 10.1007/s42087-021-00201-6
. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
. (2022). Sustainable development goals: Knowledge platform. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org
(2014). An invitation to cultural psychology. Sage.
(Eds.). (2016). Psychology as a science of human being: The Yokohama manifesto. Springer.
