Tuesday’s (Belated) Highlights

Better late than never, eh? Actually, I started this in the morning (after traveling last night … I didn’t leave enough to make it to the job site with breakfast + shower + link collect and report). 

  1. Art forgetting beauty.
  2. Feel safer now?
  3. Not a land shark.
  4. A suggestion that malfeasance (or incompetence) was a strategy.
  5. Streeeettttchsh the chicken.
  6. I’m with the blogger on this, you run into a parked car, it’s your own damn fault.
  7. Uncertainty and hiring. Ya think?
  8. A homily for our times.
  9. Or … if you have a modern viewpoint on the worth of a vow taken.
  10. Some liberals claim that they hold the “reality position” due to the fact that the putative experts are mostly liberal … but when those experts keep making claims like this … well, reality bites.
  11. Art and autism.
  12. It’d be nice if our government said it too … and heck not just talked the talk, but y’now walked the walk. 
  13. If you find offense in that picture, you need take a sanity check.
  14. A link to a good post, and Krugman keeps his ideological blinders on.
  15. Attacking the straw man.
  16. Someday, yes, someday I’m going to be able to read past the first five sentences of one of Eli’s acerbic attacks and not run into something he says that isn’t flipping idiotic. Let me try to be specific, “Twice he describes something as “attractive,” surely an odd choice given that he means to discuss something fundamentally moral and not just a matter of mere taste.” Hello, there are whole schools of ethics which equate the beauty and the good and furthermore find that ethics boils down to choosing the good (or beautiful) and that what constitutes beauty is not “just a matter of taste” it depends on asthetics and a theory of the same, which has no a priori dependence on taste.

2 Responses to Tuesday’s (Belated) Highlights

  1. I think you have two major variables to test here:

    Honor/shame culture?
    High economic opportunity?

    To what degree does economic opportunity create, as a side effect, unhappiness, child neglect, abuse etc? Keep in mind that economic opportunities widen the gap between society’s winners and losers, offer a person more to envy and more reason to be unhappy with his status. If you combined economic growth with a shame culture would you get people who are happy and rich as opposed to just happy or would you get people who blow the shame aspect up a million fold?

  2. Boonton,
    Paul Collier noted that statistically disparities in wealth is uncorrelated with civil war and violence among third world countries … which given that we are also told 70% of the world’s population are H/S cultures … are predominantly H/S cultures. Here’s the thing. You and I are, those same anthropologists tell us, in a culture which is primarily driven by economic status. So … you’re point about economic opportunity and disparity as important likely has more to do with your background in a Economic/Individualist culture than anything else. So, no I don’t expect a wealthy H/S culture to express the same reaction to wealth disparity.

    Traditionally, H/S cultures are in a different economic model then we live by. They are more likely to be tied to agricultural roots and the normal expectation is that economics is zero-sum, i.e., you getting rich means some other people are getting poor. So in that environment being personally economically ambitious is seen as a bad thing (which also leads to a natural understanding why high economic growth is not prevalent).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>