A society’s time structures become deeply internalized as personality traits, not just external regulation.

Evidence

Second, the temporal structures of a given society are both cognitively and normatively binding as well as anchored deep within the personality structure that determines the habitus of individuals. Thus Norbert Elias emphasizes, on the one hand, the functional character of concepts of time, which for him serve primarily to coordinate and synchronize social processes and therefore develop and become further refined to the extent that the growing social complexity and length of chains of interdependence require more precise planning, regulation, and ordering of time. On the other hand, he stresses that the individual’s socially produced consciousness of time is, as a social habitus and as it were second nature, an inextricable component of one’s personality: “The experience of time of an individual belonging to a society that strictly regulates time is one example out of many for personality structures that are no less compulsory than biological characteristics and yet are socially acquired.” — Hartmut Rosa, Social Acceleration, 86

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to Elias’s civilizing-process argument about self-control and to Foucault’s disciplinary society, which the author himself notes in the following paragraph. — connects to: Social context becomes internalised and shapes desires. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 50; Individual time is socially structured and largely beyond personal disposal; The temporal structures of a society shape our sense of being in the world — Hartmut Rosa, Social Acceleration: A New Theory of…, 65 (+3 more)
  • DEFINE: Defines how ‘temporal structures’ operate at both systemic and personality levels.

Broader Connections