The Type of Man or the Maximand.2011-2012

8/3/2019 The Type of Man or the Maximand.2011-2012

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-type-of-man-or-the-maximand2011-2012 1/29

THE TYPE OF MAN or THE

MAXIMAND



THE BASIC ASSUMPTION OF A SOCIAL

THEORY

• Social theories is about interactive human

action

• Human action assumes human goals/ends

• Man depicted by goals: the proper way to

depict a man

•

Built in Values/preferences (mind set,programme)



HOW TO DEPICT MAN?

• Not one single goal (like happiness)

• Not a lot of goals (impossible to follow)

•

The best situation=two goals:

• 1/preferences inversely related

• 2/costs inversely related• 3/easy to compare



SUGGESTION

• The two goals will overlap with fields of our

external reality because of the anti-entropic

nature of life

• Anti-entropic

• Individual not species: sociobiology and

economics as well assumes: individual is the

unit of selection



INDIVIDUAL AND ITS EXTERNAL

REALITY



POSSIBLE DIFFICULTY

• Can we squeeze down all human goals to just

two mega-goals?

• Nature=absolute wealth

• Human species=relative power

• Examples:

•

Interest in sports• Interest in dance



ABSOLUTE WEALTH AND RELATIVE

POWER

d

B

d

A

d

B A aa p /



A- THE SRONG, B- THE WEAK



A- THE SRONG, C- NOT SO WEAK



TYPES OF HUMAN PERSONALITIES



GENERAL WEALTH:ABSOLUTE WEALTH

+RELATIVE POWER (RELATIVE WEALTH)

• The absolute wealth is associated with theencouragement of activities like maximizing profit asan end in itself, functional asceticism (a level of asceticism which is compatible with absolute wealth

growth), rejection of consumerism, encouragement of standardizing life (which is compatible withstandardizing production and efficiency), and labour ascalling and specialization in one field.

• The relative wealth or the relative power aspect of

wealth is associated with a high preference for leisure,sociability, idle talk, luxury consumption, ostentatiousconsumption, sports, hunting and all-round education.



ABSOLUTE WEALTH

• For Protestants, “To wish to be poor was...thesame as wishing to be unhealthy” (Weber,1985:163)

• the type of businessman shaped byProtestantism,...: “He avoids ostentation andunnecessary expenditure, as well as consciousenjoyment of his power, and is embarrassedby the outward signs of the social recognitionwhich he receives” (Weber, 1985:71).



RELATIVE WEALTH (RELATIVE POWER)

• “From the standpoint of possible capitalisticdevelopment, the acquisitiveness of Indians of all strata left little to be desired and nowhere

is to be found so little antichrematism andsuch high evaluation of wealth”(Weber,1958:4).

• “Even Confucius would strive after riches,though it might be as a servant, whip in hand”(Weber, 1984:53).



REASONS FROM SOCIOBIOLOGY

• The orthodox social science=huge differencebetween human species and the other animalspecies. Koslowski (1999) argue that reduced

competition within humanity is due to thehuman spirit and the quality of art

• The GP perspective: Dawkins: the highopportunity cost an individual is facing whenhe tries to exploit other individuals of thesame species . This is a general principle



Sources of the high opportunity cost of

trapping the other members of the species

• Power equality

• Mates/copies of one’s own identity



DAWKINS

• “As far as a gene is concerned, its alleles[alternative forms] are its deadly rivals, butother genes are just part of its environment

comparable to temperature, food, predators,or companions” (Dawkins, 1976:38).

• In characterizing natural selection, Dawkinsstates: “I think ‘nature red in tooth and claw’sums up our modern understanding of naturalselection admirably” (Dawkins, 1976:2).



GREAT SOCIAL SCHOLARS ABOUT THE

GP MAXIMAND (I)

• To be observed, to be attended, to be taken

notice of with sympathy, complacency, and

approbation, are all the advantages which we

can propose to derive from it. It is the vanity,not the ease, or the pleasure which interests

us. (Smith, 1976:50)



II

• For what purpose is the toil and bustle of this world?What is the end of avarice and ambition, of the pursuitof wealth, of power, and preheminence? It is thesupply of necessities of nature? The wages of the

meanest labourer can supply them. We see that theyafford him food and clothing, the comfort of a house,and of a family. If we examined his oeconomy withrigour, we should find that he spends a great part of them upon conveniencies, which may regarded as

superfluities, and that, upon extraordinary occasions,he can give something even to vanity and distinction.(Smith, 1976:50)



III

• The greatest part of the utility of wealth,

beyond a very moderate quantity, is not the

indulgences it procures, but the reserved

power which its possessor holds in his handsof obtaining purposes generally; and this

power no other kind of wealth confers so

immediately or so certainly as money. (Mill,2004:35)



IV

• We really, and justly, look upon a person as

possessing the advantage of wealth, not in

proportion to the useful and agreeable things

of which he is in the actual enjoyment, but tohis command over the general fund of things

useful and agreeable. (Mill, 2004:34)



V

• to a man nothing is more pleasant in his own

goods as that they are greater than those of

others. (Hobbes, 1994:108)

• At the beginning of Leviathan’s second part,

Hobbes states, although in brackets, that men

“naturally love liberty and dominion over

others” (1994:106)



VI

• The cultural stage based on predatory activityemerges from a “peaceful savagery” and ischaracterized by “an habitual bellicose frame of mind” (Veblen, 1992:32). Consequently,

possessed wealth is evidence of a successful raid.This possession extends from owning people toowning the products of their industry. This groupof successful individuals makes up what Veblen

terms theleisure class

; it is a class of individualswho do not engage in industrial activities (wealth

production) but in exploitation.



VII

• The invidious comparison now becomes

primarily a comparison of the owner with

other members of the group. Property is still

of the nature of a trophy, but, with thecultural advance, it becomes more a trophy of

success scored in the game of ownership

carried on between the members of the groupunder the quasi-peaceful methods of nomadic

life. (Veblen, 1992:36)



VIII

• It was precisely man’s competitiveness and

vanity, his desire to dominate and rule, which

was the wellspring of social creativity,

ensuring the realization of potentials “unbornin an Arcadian Shepard’s life.” (Fukuyama,

1992:58)



IX

• A psychology, or a political science, that did

not take into account man’s desire for

recognition, and his infrequent but very

pronounced willingness to act at timescontrary to even the strongest natural instinct,

would misunderstand something very

important about human behavior. (Fukuyama,1992:152)



X

• The king of America has a sense of dignity

missing entirely from the English day-laborer,

a dignity that is born of his freedom, self-

sufficiency, and the respect and recognition hereceives from the community around him.

The day-laborer may eat better, but he is

totally dependent on an employer to whomhe is virtually invisible as a human being.

(Fukuyama, 1992:174)



XI

• In almost all languages, from those of the

simplest primitive people to those of Indo-

European groups, in Arabic, Japanese and

Chinese, there is invariably a term to indicateenvy or the envious person. Proverbs of the

most varied cultures deal with it in hundreds

of different forms. Aphorists and philosophershave touched on it. (Schoeck, 1987:4)



XII

• Social sciences in America particularly presentthe view that man is a rational or economicallyrational being, ever striving for direct profit ordirect expedience. This utility theory is alsoapplied to power that would never be exercisedfor its own sake, but used to reach a purpose.The principle of the “economically rational”

human being proves to be wrong, even in ourculture, and is notably untrue in the field of power. (Mulder, 1977:2)



XIII

• Based on a volume of data unrivaled until

that time, Hofstede identifies five dimensions

along which cultures vary. Most significant

for my approach, the most important culturaldimension within Hofstede’s concept of

culture is the power distance norm. In

ranking power, Hofstede implicitly rankswealth; that is, explicitly and implicitly, he

ranks the two mega-goods wealth and power.

Documents

The Type of Man or the Maximand.2011-2012