4 ms·
A nice read. Somehow I had a misconception that commune-dwellers might not be too invested in quantifying much at all. I'm glad they can make this work for abo
by claydavisss 8y ago
A nice read. Somehow I had a misconception that commune-dwellers might not be too invested in quantifying much at all.
I'm glad they can make this work for about a hundred or so folks. I wonder what the natural limit for this sort of arrangement is.
- LyndsySimon 8y ago> I wonder what the natural limit for this sort of arrangement is. For communal arrangements like this, I think the generally accepted value is around 200. See "Dunbar's Number": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
- sdenton4 8y agoOr 75,000? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation
- jnmandal 8y agoThere is no "generally accepted value" here. Its contentious to say there is a natural limit at all. Dunbar's number also has nothing to do with this type of society. The American Amish community (150k population) is basically an anti-modern religious group which is run on a communal model. Many members of that society live all their lives without meeting each other. As another commenter mentioned, Mondragon in Spain has close to 75k members in its cooperative.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoThe Amish are split up into smaller communities and establish new settlements when density gets too high. The Wikipedia page itself mentions that the Anabaptist Hutterites limit themselves to 150 person groups.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]