<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Snowbound Commons</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/</link>
	<description>faults &#124; sins &#124; abuses</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-374</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/archives/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-374</guid>
		<description>Hmm... I've been working on stringing together some thoughts on learning communities and the academic commons, and Hardin's quote about morality dovetails with some things I read in Lakoff's Moral Politics. I recommend the book, Mike, particularly the first chapter or three where he talks about the metaphor of "moral arithmetic" and obligation it entails/connotes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm&#8230; I&#8217;ve been working on stringing together some thoughts on learning communities and the academic commons, and Hardin&#8217;s quote about morality dovetails with some things I read in Lakoff&#8217;s Moral Politics. I recommend the book, Mike, particularly the first chapter or three where he talks about the metaphor of &#8220;moral arithmetic&#8221; and obligation it entails/connotes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-375</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/archives/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-375</guid>
		<description>The Lakoff sounds interesting. I've been reading about exchange-based economies as opposed to reciprocity-based economies as opposed to gift economies, and how exchange is always haunted by the specter of enforcement -- does that line up at all with Lakoff's view of the right as more oriented towards authority and obedience?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Lakoff sounds interesting. I&#8217;ve been reading about exchange-based economies as opposed to reciprocity-based economies as opposed to gift economies, and how exchange is always haunted by the specter of enforcement &#8212; does that line up at all with Lakoff&#8217;s view of the right as more oriented towards authority and obedience?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-376</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/archives/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-376</guid>
		<description>The nutshell answer to your question is yes. I fear that I've got the beginnings of the killer crud myself, so I don't trust my ability to precis what Lakoff is saying, but yes--conservatives in his conception live by a set of metaphors he names the "Strict Father Morality". Reciprocity, obedience, an emphasis on self-discipline, denial of pleasure, and the like all grouped into a coherent view of both family and society.

I'm still trying to connect it all more explicitly with economy and exchange: is ownership and strict reciprocity consonant with the conservative worldview, and is copyleft and share-alike more in line with the "Nurturant Parent" model Lakoff describes? What's the connection of all of this with ideas of the college/university as a locus of in-kind exchange, of an academic commons? I'm still pounding it out without much in the way of an Archimedean moment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The nutshell answer to your question is yes. I fear that I&#8217;ve got the beginnings of the killer crud myself, so I don&#8217;t trust my ability to precis what Lakoff is saying, but yes&#8211;conservatives in his conception live by a set of metaphors he names the &#8220;Strict Father Morality&#8221;. Reciprocity, obedience, an emphasis on self-discipline, denial of pleasure, and the like all grouped into a coherent view of both family and society.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m still trying to connect it all more explicitly with economy and exchange: is ownership and strict reciprocity consonant with the conservative worldview, and is copyleft and share-alike more in line with the &#8220;Nurturant Parent&#8221; model Lakoff describes? What&#8217;s the connection of all of this with ideas of the college/university as a locus of in-kind exchange, of an academic commons? I&#8217;m still pounding it out without much in the way of an Archimedean moment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-377</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/archives/2003/12/07/the-snowbound-commons/#comment-377</guid>
		<description>Hm. Not having read Lakoff, I'll say that I can see how the metaphors might work, but when you ask what things are consonant with one another, I worry about piling too many metaphors atop one another. After all, reciprocity can be constructed both as generosity of spirit and also as adherence to exchange. There's a continuum from "consevative" to "liberal" (and of course, even something as two-dimensional as the Political Compass shows us how reductive that continuum is), but is it elitist to wonder whether there's also a continuum of political nuance?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hm. Not having read Lakoff, I&#8217;ll say that I can see how the metaphors might work, but when you ask what things are consonant with one another, I worry about piling too many metaphors atop one another. After all, reciprocity can be constructed both as generosity of spirit and also as adherence to exchange. There&#8217;s a continuum from &#8220;consevative&#8221; to &#8220;liberal&#8221; (and of course, even something as two-dimensional as the Political Compass shows us how reductive that continuum is), but is it elitist to wonder whether there&#8217;s also a continuum of political nuance?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
