[August 1975] [1]. Cogitations

[The following eight entries were recorded or written in France.]

Suppose I want to have a method of measuring or of mathematical manipulation that would be appropriate to the world of emotion to which I am accustomed: I hear a baby crying; I am filled with sorrow for the poor little thing, and possibly for the parent who is concerned to look after it. Supposing, then, that I hear two babies crying – then I might be even more upset. Supposing, however, that I hear, say, fifty of them crying and wailing in the same way; instead of being fifty times as compassionate, I find that I am becoming amused at the racket that is going on. Why is it that such a thing should take place? And how should I express this mathematically? I could say that I ought to be – as far as any mathematical system known to me is concerned – fifty times as upset or depressed. But in this instance the quantity has effected an emotional change, so the emotions that I am wanting to deal with, to measure, to speak about, to cope with, have altered in quality when I would expect them to alter in quantity.

Is there some form of mathematics that would give me the appropriate answer or solution of a problem to which I want to apply it in emotional terms? I am not simply talking about the number of babies, or the number of people, but a situation in which I require a kind of mathematics that not only shows or expresses a change in quantity, but also a change in quantity inseparable from a change in quality.

In the instance I am giving I could pose the problem like this: there is myself, one of me; and there is one baby. Is it 1 × 1 = depression? Or 1 × 2 = depression × 2? Or is it 1 baby + depressed person = 2 depressed people? Or is it 1 + 2 = 3 depressed people? What happens when it ought to be 1 + 50, or 1 × 50? What should be appropriate manipulation be? What should one do with the mathematical symbols in the nature of bringing them together, or perhaps, for that matter, or bringing them apart? 1 separa