Hi Kevin,

On Nov 5, 2011, at 8:17 AM, Kevin Kervick wrote:
> But if we are talking about adults here, and inter-familial connection then 
> we should look at voluntary association rather than codependency or coercion.

That's an interesting ideological perspective.  But is it supported by the 
data, either historical or sociological?

Historically, not very much.  Early kingdoms largely functioned as extended 
families -- actually, clans *are* extended families.  Early religion the same 
way.  Yes, people can join voluntarily -- just like people join a family 
through marriage or adoption (well, semi-voluntary) -- but once inside, it is 
anything but egalitarian.

Sociologically, virtually no associations are a pure "free meeting of equals".  
Every viable group has a functioning hierarchy, structure, roles, and rules.  
When we join the group, we surrender our freedom to act disjointly from those 
roles.   Yeah, the modern of idea of a social contract between peers is a 
powerful one -- but it is still an abstraction, only useful in certain 
circumstances.

And the issue of birth is hardly trivial.  We inherit not just our culture, but 
vast amounts of resources from the society we are born into.  Does that convey 
no obligation whatsoever?

I would that that voluntary choices *modify* what we inherit, but what we are 
born into is actually far more critical in the vast majority of cases.  You 
surely know that as a psychologist -- why wouldn't it be true socially?

> In family therapy we promote psychological differentiation - the capacity to 
> be both seperate and connected simultaneously. Development is fusion - 
> individuation - differentiation.  That process starts at birth.  So, I'd 
> argue that individuality is a requisite capacity that enables true communion 
> with others.  That is why many community/religious traditions believe baptism 
> into the fold can only occur 
> after one reaches the age of consent - in most traditions that occurs in late 
> adolescence or early adulthood.

Baptism is  great metaphor, which points out the flaw in your model.  
Development is fusion - individuation - differentiation - COMMITMENT.  You 
can't ignore that last part, or you'll never create a next generation.

Like I said, you sure sound like you don't have kids. I fear it is more than 
coincidence that most philosophers (starting with Socrates) were lousy fathers. 
 Raising children puts all our philosophical theories to the tests -- and most 
don't survive.  And if we can't even figure out how to raise our kids, how in 
hell can we figure out how to elevate civilization?

-- Ernie P.

P.S. Gotta go put my money where my mouth is -- my son just stole my iPhone, 
and my daughter is turning one today...

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to