intersubjective disagreements, Markets and Democracy
August 7, 2013 1 Comment
I still believe democracy is still important. I also believe in the spirit of civil rights: that a person has ownership over his body and is free to cognate (think, feel, be attract to, be mindful of) as he/she wishes — whether I like what or how or a person thinks or not. Its really that outward actions that one places guidelines and restrictions on — this: responsibility part of freedom/responsibility. what one “owns”, one is responsible for. Freedom and responsibility are intertwined.
This is an ideal condition. More accurately i believe most people are best suited gaining relative freedom, responsibility, and self-sustainability, whether by pursuing these concepts or recognizing opportunity as they come along. Physical and circumstantial conditions can limit these realizations for any person. However I am going to stick to an ideal concepts for now.
If freedom of choice and thought is individual right to cognate as he/she wishes, then responsibility is something that includes more than an individual.. a group or a society. How can a group of free thinking and choosing individuals, with so many different attitudes and thought processes, come together and decide how not to trample over each other with their actions?
The following video is an interesting video that suggests that Democracy is, metaphorically, a intersubjective market place for individuals to decide standard value and meaning in a group dynamic… such as community or society.
“subjective disagreements, market and intersubjectivity“
posted originally 6-06-2011
A market, group or society makes decisions on values and meanings as a whole while its diversity engines the interaction between components or individuals.
Interesting video shared by randyhe.[..]man entitled “Intersubjectivity“.
The narrator uses the example of a stock in a market to demonstrate how intersubjective relationships determine value. As he demonstrates on the chalkboard it is the the whole of a free market that determines a price of a stock, and the market requires subjective disagreements between individuals with different perspectives to work. That is, without the differences of subjective valuing of a particular stock, with different subjective opinions of the individual buyers, sellers , no trading activity would take place.
Even though the participants have come to this market with similar interests: business, market trading, interest in a the same stock, …it is the difference of their belief ( in particular the worth and value of a stock) that makes the market work.
If I look at this Market as a simplified model of a society, what can I infer?
Although people often seek out common interests, values and other people like themselves… its the diversification of people in a democratic society that sets the societies values.
We are in a society as bound by our differences and disagreements as we are bound by our similarities.
if our economy is engined by the diversity of subjective disagreement in valuing, diversity of professions, I may assume that socially …as communities or nations… we are better with diversity. Diversity in faiths, philosophies, opinions, conservative and liberal view points, life styles, etc.
What can we live with?
A society makes decisions as a whole based on values and belief that are different then its individuals. This means to preserve our individual rights, beliefs and values we must tolerate other subjective rights, beliefs an values, and come to common decisions we can all live with, decide by a democratic society as a whole.
A democratic society of individuals in complex relationship is powered by its diversity of subjective view points and lifestyles ,as it is its common-ness.
If we do agree as a democratic society that diversity is a necessary….or at least diversity is a positive attribute, than we must have some definition of tolerance.
One must be able demonstrate patience and fairness when dealing other individuals who think, believe and act differently then himself, if not welcome the differences.
One must be able to deal fairly with people differing faith, ethnicity, health, education , background, gender and age, etc that is different then themselves, as they have different needs and values, but are just as important to a society.
Tolerance is an important personal ethic to define, just as other intersubjective ethics such as reciprocity and dignity.
Society and the individual.
I think that, if we look objectively at societies as gestalts of intersubjective interaction, we can better understand the relationship of the individual to society. At the same time individuals interact within a spectrum of agreeing and disagreeing values ,beliefs, and perspectives they also come together to make decisions as a whole in democratic community, nation, or society.
And if you disagree with me, I will respect that. :)