DeVliegendeHollander comments on Virtue, group and individual prestige - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (16)
This is an excellent point, not necessarily because it is true, but because it suggests the idea of status is not sufficiently clearly defined. Personally I don't think politeness/respect/consideration equals status, but sure as hell they have some sort of a relation and interaction.
In a very polite group, it would be very hard to express status differences, and in a very impolite group too. It seems status games develop where people have a middling level of politeness/respect...
Moreover I suspect people know this and use politeness and impoliteness for this purpose. In a boot camp when the sarge just called everybody a worthless maggot it will be hard to play at looking a like a slightly less worthless maggot than the other guy :) And the overly elaborate formal politeness of 19th century aristocrats (e.g. the novel The Count of Monte-Cristo) makes it hard, too, you can hardly express disapproval.
Winning a boxing match is insta-status amongst the fans. They are middling polite with fighters, they have a "let's see what you can do" mood. They don't disrespect anyone who trains hard and gives his best, neither do they sugar-coat defeat.