16.7.05

Limited good

While working on the honor entries, I read this in the HSB and it was apparent that this was a fundamental, key difference. We will see that honor has some similarities to quantitative commodities, but how we view commodies is quite different from the perspective of 'limited good'. Neyrey explains this point:
"Limited good" is a social construct, that is, a product of human imagination and reasoning, which views the world as a zero-sum game. Residents of modern industrial countries tend to think of an "expanding" economy that has access to unlimited reserves of minerals and power; this modern economy preaches that all workers can expect is an ever-rising standard of living. (2000, p.122)
The phrase "zero-sum" may be better understood when seeing some logical outworkings:
- Any advantage achieved by a person or group is seen as a loss to others (Neyrey, 2000, p.123). "Prosperity only occurs at the loss of others" (Malina & Seeman, 2000, p.61).
- There is reluctance to become greater than one's peers due to the reactions of those peers (Neyrey, 2000, p.124).
Even if praise is given, it is percieved that others are losing out. All commodities--health, wealth, even honor, are seen as very limited. Neyrey cites Plutarch saying, "As though commendation were money, he feels that he is robbing himself of every bit that he bestows on another" (On Listening to Lectures, 44B). Thus, a "zero-sum game" is where adding up all the commodities totals to zero--supposing that "have"'s and "have-not"'s cancel each other out.

So keep that in mind as we proceed in a cursory look at some other ancient concepts. As one (whether group or individual) grows in honor, it is seen that others are losing honor. We may return to this if we touch upon 'envy'.

_____
Malina, B., & Seeman, C. (2000). Envy. In Pilch, J., & Malina, B. (eds.), Handbook of Biblical Social Values (pp. 122-127)). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.
Neyrey, J. (2000). Limited good. In Pilch, J., & Malina, B. (eds.), Handbook of Biblical Social Values (pp. 122-127)). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.

1 comment:

  1. It's also interesting to note that some of the pushes toward being environmentally friendly seem to rest upon the idea of limited good. Our resources won't last forever, and yet we as a whole seem to live as if they will. I'm guessing a lot of interesting sociopolitical things could be said here, too.

    I have big problems viewing limited good as limited as the ancients did. Feeling discomfort when you praise someone, because it takes away from yourself? I guess it's because one of the fundamental assumptions I have is that there's enough to go around.

    This is also where the panic of John the Baptist's disciples stem from. Jesus is increasing, and that means JtB is decreasing. Yet JtB acknowledges this and says it must be. It's logical, though... if JtB believed that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, then he'd also believe that Jesus must increase in honor. His own expense is nothing, for this IS the Messiah.

    ReplyDelete