November 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Blog powered by Typepad

« Libertarians for Obama | Main | FEE Podcasts Now Available »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451eb0069e200e554f5ec308833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Quote of the Day:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I do not have much to say about this quote, but it's killing me that no one has commented on it. It is *great* and I thank Steve for his post on it.

Just thinking:

If we are all essentially similar: Hypothesis one, state of nature humans (by definition) are illadapted to withstand the elements (lack of hair, no claws).
Hypothesis two, there is more variance within any one category or group than there is between the median or mean member of the most diverse groups of humans. There exist no two human groups which could not reproduce.

Question one: What makes us exaggerate diversity?

It seems that the construct of diversity (pejorative) allows communitarian values to form. These provide checks against free-riding (to put it in a parsimonious model). I belong to and advance the survival of my tribe (ingroup).

Questions two: What are the communitarian roots of the division of labor?

Seems like the Marxist theory of history, primitive communism is the most widely repeated story of this tendency. I suppose that we can take issue with some of the normative descriptive elements. However, it is important if there are such anthropological pre-barter societies. I assume that removing the distinction between tribes and families allows us to carry small bands forward with a type of community that we see in much smaller groups today.

Question three: What converts communitarian tendency to larger trading circles where diversity is now seen as an advantage?

Seems that biologically the necessity to form marriage pacts with groups of other tribes (exceeding 500 according to Jared Diamond) provides some essential exchange necessity of exchange (both biological and metaphysical). As civilization progresses maybe there is more voluntary trade and relatively fewer slaving raids. As people settle down and towns become large enough to hold more than 500 people, the desire for diversity still lingers. There seems to be an essential (elemental) tension between diversity and community. (The Spartans are on one end of this and the Romans perhaps on the other? Where do the Athenians fit?)

The comments to this entry are closed.