4 ms·

So long as there have been people, there have been those who had more than others, be it material goods or power, which gains more material goods, which begets

So long as there have been people, there have been those who had more than others, be it material goods or power, which gains more material goods, which begets power. I'm not really sure there it's true that any society predates wealth, ergo no social construct predates wealth.

qarl 8d ago
Right. I'm thinking of social behaviors that predate humans.
- zdragnar 8d ago
  Territory and hunting grounds are a form of wealth, in that it is a form of control over shelter and natural resources like food and water. Money is a social construct for trading value, but is not itself a prerequisite for the accumulation of value (wealth).
  - qarl 8d ago
    I think you missed my point. Let me try again: > ergo no social construct predates wealth. What about the social construct of parenting?
    - zdragnar 8d ago
      Easily argued to be a natural, biological instinct, and not a social construct.
      - qarl 8d ago
        Yes, most social contracts do stem from evolved strategies. That was my original point. But parenting in humans varies from culture to culture. That's what makes it a social construct.
pixl97 8d ago
>ergo no social construct predates wealth. How wealthy is your dog?
- zdragnar 8d ago
  Compared to feral dogs, quite wealthy indeed. They've claimed sleeping and feeding spots that are very valuable for being both safe and climate controlled, and have a number of chew bones and toys that are free of dangerous splintering wood, animal bone, parasites and fleas. These are things that are valuable enough to fight over and will contribute greatly to their lifespan. If you think the only measure of wealth is money, you have it backwards- money is a polite fiction representing an abstraction of value, and is only good for use as an exchange into another more concrete form of value.
  - qarl 8d ago
    I think you missed his point - that social behaviors exist outside and before human societies.
    - zdragnar 8d ago
      You've missed the point of my response- wealth, as in the accumulation of value- is not uniquely human. It is born out of the inability to see into the future, gathering resources to survive times of hardship. It is securing the most desirable mates, controlling territory, being the first to get the choicest fruits or bites of prey. It is this biological imperative that pushes humans to desire ever more, and only higher order thinking- social behavior, religious discipline, whatever floats your boat- that suppresses those instincts into virtue, altruism or civility. So, when I replied to the following: > Well... no. I'd say that most of the social constructs I'm thinking of predate wealth. Most likely shaped by evolutionary pressures. I'm pointing out that the social constructs were shaped as a reaction to our nature, which includes a intrinsic, if subconscious, understanding of the concept of value and wealth.
      - qarl 8d ago

qarl 8d ago

Right. I'm thinking of social behaviors that predate humans.

zdragnar 8d ago
Territory and hunting grounds are a form of wealth, in that it is a form of control over shelter and natural resources like food and water. Money is a social construct for trading value, but is not itself a prerequisite for the accumulation of value (wealth).
- qarl 8d ago
  I think you missed my point. Let me try again: > ergo no social construct predates wealth. What about the social construct of parenting?
  - zdragnar 8d ago
    Easily argued to be a natural, biological instinct, and not a social construct.
    - qarl 8d ago
      Yes, most social contracts do stem from evolved strategies. That was my original point. But parenting in humans varies from culture to culture. That's what makes it a social construct.

pixl97 8d ago

>ergo no social construct predates wealth. How wealthy is your dog?

zdragnar 8d ago
Compared to feral dogs, quite wealthy indeed. They've claimed sleeping and feeding spots that are very valuable for being both safe and climate controlled, and have a number of chew bones and toys that are free of dangerous splintering wood, animal bone, parasites and fleas. These are things that are valuable enough to fight over and will contribute greatly to their lifespan. If you think the only measure of wealth is money, you have it backwards- money is a polite fiction representing an abstraction of value, and is only good for use as an exchange into another more concrete form of value.
- qarl 8d ago
  I think you missed his point - that social behaviors exist outside and before human societies.
  - zdragnar 8d ago
    You've missed the point of my response- wealth, as in the accumulation of value- is not uniquely human. It is born out of the inability to see into the future, gathering resources to survive times of hardship. It is securing the most desirable mates, controlling territory, being the first to get the choicest fruits or bites of prey. It is this biological imperative that pushes humans to desire ever more, and only higher order thinking- social behavior, religious discipline, whatever floats your boat- that suppresses those instincts into virtue, altruism or civility. So, when I replied to the following: > Well... no. I'd say that most of the social constructs I'm thinking of predate wealth. Most likely shaped by evolutionary pressures. I'm pointing out that the social constructs were shaped as a reaction to our nature, which includes a intrinsic, if subconscious, understanding of the concept of value and wealth.
    - qarl 8d ago