On 2012-03-11, at 2:53 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
> I think it applies to internet debates as well. Status and reputation
> are not trivial things - people typically go to extraordinary efforts
> and expenses to defend them. Their actions may appear irrational to
> economists, but not to sociologists.
>
> Wojtek
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Marv Gandall <marvgand at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2012-03-11, at 2:30 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
>>
>>> Marv: "Or, as Kissinger slyly observed, "academic political debates
>>> are so heated because the stakes are so low".
>>>
>>> [WS:] I beg to differ. I do not think Mr. Kissinger understood the
>>> nature of academic environment. Academic debates are so heated
>>> because the stakes are extremely high - personal reputation, status
>>> and careers of the involved parties. If Mr. Kissinger gives in to
>>> foreign demands, his status as a statesman is not affected, and may
>>> even increase if his action is perceived as a clever move to avoid
>>> future disaster. If an academic gives up an opinion on which his
>>> academic status is built, he or she is pretty much finished,
>>> especially is he or she plays the academic celebrity game.
>>
>> Let me rephrase it, then: "Online left-wing debates are so heated because the stakes are so low." The stakes which contribute to solidarity are not reputational, but matters of life and death. The stakes in online debates, as in the academy, are purely reputational.
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>
> --
> Wojtek
> http://wsokol.blogspot.com/
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk