Going for the nice simplistic view

[andrewducker]

[Poll #527619]

Comments

[hfnuala.livejournal.com]

Umm, both?

[andrewducker]

Yeah, me too. Which is why I don't have an answer in for my own question. I'm surprised that anyone's answered it at all, to be honest :->

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

I went "bof!"

[channelpenguin.livejournal.com]

Both, of course

[stillcarl.livejournal.com]

If Society is the way it is because that's how people _are_, then every human society in the world would be the same. They're not, therefore it's People are the way they are because society _makes them_ that way.

[andrewducker]

then every human society in the world would be the same
Only if the cirumstances were the same.

Are you saying that the differences between cultures are greater than the similarities?

[blackmanxy.livejournal.com]

Normally, I mock people who always have to point out that the exact option they want isn't in a poll, but this is pretty black and white. Count me in the "both" group.

[cx650.livejournal.com]

I believe both are true depending on the individual.

[draconid.livejournal.com]

Ditto.

[wolfieboy.livejournal.com]

I think Society and People are incestuous lovemates and we are a result of their inbreeding.

[moniqueleigh]

Erm. Yes.

Both?

[wordofblake.livejournal.com]

I agree that there is a certain amount of interaction which makes it a sort of cross pollination, but to answer the question in the poll I had to decide which had the bigger effect.

I decided that (largely) our society is sick and callous and overly money orientated. I know people can be (and are) all those things too, but to a lesser extent.

So I think it is fair to say society corrupts people more than they corrupt it

Re: Both?

[andrewducker]

I think that there's a fair amount of variation, and certainly society can make one more or less money oriented, but there doesn't seem to be a society on the planet (at any point in history) which _wasn't_ money/status/power oriented. Which indicates that deep down, most people might be that way inclined.

This doesn't, of course, apply to everyone. Most of the people I know aren't like that, and thank goodness.

Re: Both?

[wordofblake.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's a group thing, a kind of abdcating resposibility. Because as individuals people do not seem to want things to be this way. How do companys have more rights than people? If people are supposed to be in charge then why do companies set policy. Money is a shared illusion that holds most (80% 90%?) of us down, so why do we keep it?

Re: Both?

[andrewducker]

Money is an abstraction for the value of property. The only way to remove it will be to get rid of the concept of property. The problem is that this leaves you with no way to encourage people to produce things or perform services. Which is fine if you only want to do things with/for your friends, but unless you personally know a farmer, a doctor, a dentist, etc., etc. who are willing to do favours for you, you're going to need _some_ kind of incentive.

And companies don't have more rights than people - they tend to have more money than any one person, largely because that's what 'company' means - a group of people acting together. But yeah, they need a lot of controls to make them act in more reasonable ways.