Comment

Comment by Mens Luxifer on December 2, 2010 at 10:17pm

Thanks for sharing. I recall watching some videos on a similar topic by Stefan Molyneaux via youtube where he discusses the problems that arise from people seeking extrinsic values.

Comment by TNT666 on November 4, 2010 at 9:23pm

:rollseyes: I'm not disagreeing with the extra cost. I'm saying given a poorer quality base, the technology would have taken a different direction and I quote myself our perception of the costs of paper would have been different

Comment by TNT666 on November 4, 2010 at 8:33pm

The point of that example is if we had transfered EARLIER along to using 100% post-consumer paper, ideally from the very beginning, the printers and copiers would have been adapted to that reality and our perception of the costs of paper would have been different. But it's too late, we've tried and that ship has sailed.

Comment by TNT666 on November 4, 2010 at 1:43am

That was an interesting read and I tend to agree with his assessment of how we got here. However I don't think I agree with his future outlook. From Reading Thomas Veblen, economist-philosopher, I've come to think that our entire modern society is ENTIRELY based on extrinsic values, since all intrinsic values have been accounted for... To use Veblen's terminology, the market law of supply and demand could function fairly reliably in a context where those goods in the market were "essential" which he considered to be housing-food-security etc. Unfortunately the laws of supply and demand break down completely in our modern world of "conspicuous consumption" which I equate to extrinsic values. Extrinsic values by their very nature, to not obey rules, they are simply whims pushed onto to us by manufacturers-corporations-marketers. We do not require bling and yachts and BMWs, they are but an extrinsic value system artificially created to sustain the extrinsic need for the illusion of constant growth, based on the false premise of unlimited resources. Maybe I'm a pessimist, but some days I think society simply waited TOO long to try to effect change.

As an environmental example: post-consumer recycled paper. In the late 80s and early 90s, we ecological groups had convinced big business to give a go to this paper. For a while, phone bills and electric bills all came in post-consumer recycled paper, magasines and newspapers looked to increasing their post-consumer content. But then reality hit, our mass production printing machines simply could not handle the large volumes of losses encured by the use of such paper. These losses caused their paper cost to double. This was unsustainable for big publications and corporations, so 100% post-consumer recycled paper has almost disappeared. The value shift came too late, the technology had moved to a new state where only top grade paper could be used.

Our ship has sailed on so many fronts that only a dramatic disruption of social hierarchy could effect any notable change. A severed limb does not need a bandaid, it needs radical surgery... we... need a revolution.

Comment by Dallas the Phallus on October 13, 2010 at 5:03pm

@ Glen: Yes, he is a good writer. I don't have enough time to read all his posts, though. I really felt he was on target with this one.

Comment by Glen Rosenberg on October 13, 2010 at 4:51pm

Thought provoking stuff, suspect it is a good generalization. Critical thinking should be mandatory in our education. It provides the best defense for mindless thinking. Mindlessness is fuel for the dictator, the politician and the pope.