Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John Brownlow jotted down the following: > But 'taken advantage of' implies you consider it a distinctly unequal > exchange, doesn't it? More that one party is required to do something without informed consent, or true/real ability to act otherwise (which I guess could be considered the same thing as unequal exchange at some level). Kids can't really say no to cutting the grass, for a whole bunch of reasons. Parents can't really say no to cleaning the bottoms of 10-month olds who need their bottoms cleaned. Many parents can't say no to their kids in the toy shop when they (the kids) are whining at the top of their voice about the new doll/videogame/whatever that they HAVE to have. Actually, the 10-month old is a bad example, because the 10-month old doesn't knowingly manipulate the situation. They simply scream like hell because it's uncomfortable. The kids in the toy store are trying to consciously manipulate the situation, although many lack the analytical skills and language to think of it in those terms. > Economic analyses of family relations are like measuring for curtains with a > voltmeter. Hehe, good one. I agree with you in principle, in as far as it is meaningless to try and quantify it in any manner. However, a very great deal of what we humans do is not all that sophisticated when you start thinking about it. We like to think of ourselves as these wonderfully evolved creatures (just look at how we describe other animals to learn what we think of ourselves) who are much too sophisticated and clever and wrapped in complex cultural intercourse to be engaged in primitive means-end driven satisficing behaviour. By contrast, I'd argue that almost everything we do can be thought of in terms of means-end driven satisficing behaviour, which we then go to great pains to hide in complex cultural-spiel (in the German sense of 'spiel'). In fact, we're so caught up in the smoke-and-mirrors these days, that we've all but forgotten why we do most things in the first place. Hence the existance of sociology. You don't see dogs sitting around trying to justify in socially acceptible, multi-syllable language why they sniff each others' arses. We like to think of ourselves as gregarious, compassionate, philanthropic, and altruistic, but pretty much we're only concerned with surviving well, being comfortable (covers a LOT), and getting laid once in a while (which is pretty much a combination of the first two ;) M. - -- Martin Howard | Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU | It is essentially contestable. email: howard.390@osu.edu | www: http://mvhoward.i.am/ +---------------------------------------