>
>
> Philp Pilkington wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Interesting dilemma... but what if people are trying to apply an entirely
> > inadequate framework to the problem? Is it material conditions generating
> > economic chaos; or is it psychological factors causing the downturn? But
> > here's a question: what if its absolute ideational and economic
> confusion?
> > What if we weren't to attribute the "cause" to either psychological OR
> > material factors and were to put it down to pure... as Sartre called
> it...
> > "nausea"?
>
> Suppose someone with an irresistable (even pathological) tendency to
> bounce a rubber ball on every brick surface he walked on. Put him in a
> village in an area where there are no bricks. What do you know, even
> that pathology doesn't result in rubber balls bouncing on brick
> pavements.
>
> Carrol
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Urr... that's kind of what I was getting at. Its not really a question of whether these things come down to economic (i.e. brick pavement) or psychological (i.e. wierd-ball-bouncing pathologies) phenomena, it seems to me to be something in between. It seems to me to be somewhere which at once generates "psychopathology" and at the very time arises out of "material reality". Sartre puts it as such:
*"Objects should not touch because they are not alive. You use them, put them back in place, you live among them. They are useful nothing more. But they touch me, it is unbearable. I am afraid of being in contact with them as though they were living beasts."*
As Sartre tends to blur the boundaries between psychopathology and objective reality - resulting in "the Nausea" - I think to understand the current situation we need to blur the boundaries between the "homo economus" and the objects he "economises" - resulting in crisis".
I think de Soto has a very interesting point when he highlights property rights... Where else but law would we find such an overlapping of objective and subjective???