Fascinating: Third world Yap Stones

[InkAddict]

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economics470/2006/07/the_stone_money.html or
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2005/09/yapping_about_m.html

"The stone money of Yap is an interesting case to consider when thinking about what money is and what role it plays in the economic and social affairs of a community. This article by Michael Bryan of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland describes the stone wheels of Yap, how they were obtained and used as gift markers both within and between tribes, and whether the stones fit the textbook definition of money."

[TalkingDog]

1. You have an interesting mind.

(noticed on the SMW)

You might also find the cultures that engage in Potlatch interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potlatch
http://www.peabody.harvard.edu/potlatch/page2.html


Every culture goes through economic upheavals that revalue and redistribute "wealth". We choose to do it the hard way by letting all the wealth accumulate at the top until the system no longer functions. Then it collapses and we start over.

The cultures that practice Potlatch avoid the worst of the labor pains of birthing a redistribution.
We could learn something from these people.


In the Doggie household we used to have "moving parties" back when there was school and grad school and teaching and job changing.

We would gather up everything we didn't need, want or couldn't bear to donate or throw away and have a big going away party.

Numbers were given to the "prizes". Random numbers were also given to the guests. During the party one of us would choose a number from each lot.

The agreed upon rules were:
You had to take the prize you "won".
You could trade, give away or barter your "prize".
You could ask someone else for their "prize".
You could donate it to Goodwill, etc.
You could not throw it away.
If you accidentally "left" it at our place, you would be mail that prize, plus some goodly amount of things that were leftover and not given away.

Now we just make up boxes and send them out randomly to our friends. Mostly former students who are out in the world become the recipients. They are still young enough to appreciate frivolity and don't have the curse of "too much stuff" as you tend to have as you get settled into one place.

[InkAddict]

2. Thanks, TalkingDog..

My kid is graduating in two weeks and her sis will be hosting a party for her day before the big walk, so this may work out; however, I think I've already broken the law against potlatch. The fake 5' fiscus tree, previously owned by daughter then me, has gone to live at my neighbor;'s house.

Her daughter may become the new owner of Hiawatha (LOL, I know that's not a SW Indian name), the large and many-armed cactus. Hiawatha was purchased from Lowe's at a cost of $16, perhaps six or seven years ago when it was perhaps 18" tall. Visiting the nurseries, I've seen several its size going for about $250 including the beautiful tall/narrow ceramic pot. I sure hope she can give it a good home w/lots of light and somes things we can all use once in a while, a little bath to clean off the dust (ouch) and a little drinkee.

BTW, the family/living room decor has an American Indian theme, many tribes represented, but I did not know about this custom...pottery from the SW tribes and sand paintings of Kokopelli, cochina dolls on mantel, sacred wood animal spirits (wolves, ducks, moose, bison, bear) from NW; bow and quiver, feathered pipes, rattles, and dreamcatchers. I had always wanted to have a totem prepared though I did not realize these sacred symbols "belonged" specifically to those who followed the Old Ways and it was bad luck to have a "commercial" one.

We lived on Tecumseh's land and now must fight to exist like GERONIMO...I so relate to their struggle to save their culture, but I sure like a casino once in a while. Gotta take the good with the bad, huh?

[eridani]

3. Lewis Hyde's "The Gift" is particularly good on this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

The gift economy connects; the commodity economy separates. Hyde does make the point that sometimes you really need separation--gifts are not appropriate for cops or judges.

http://www.southerncrossreview.org/4/schwartz.html

There is another area of Western culture where a remnant of the old gift economy is still active: the scientific community. In examining the community of science, Hyde begins by noting that within this community it is the scientist who shares ideas with others--- who gives away rather than acquires--- who receives the most recognition and status. What, then, is the effect on science of treating ideas as gifts, as contributions to the community? Hyde presents an interesting case:


The task of science is to describe and explain the physical world, or more generally, to develop an integrated body of theory that can account for the facts, and predict them. Even such a brief prospectus points toward several reasons why ideas might be treated as gifts, the first being that the task of assembling a mass of disparate facts into a coherent whole clearly lies beyond the powers of a single mind or even a single generation. All such broad intellectual undertakings call for a community of scholars, one in which each individual thinker can be awash in the ideas of his comrades so that a sort of 'group mind' develops, one that is capable of cognitive tasks beyond the powers of any single person. The commerce of ideas--- donated, accepted (or rejected), integrated---constitutes the thinking of such a mind. . . .. 'deas in physics are discussed, presented at meetings, tried out and known to the inner circle of physicists working in the great centers long before they are published in papers and books. . . .' A scientist may conduct his research in solitude, but he cannot do it in isolation. The ends of science require coordination. Each individual's work must 'fit,' and the synthetic nature of gift exchange makes it an appropriate medium for this integration; it is not just people that must be brought together but the ideas themselves.

In science, as elsewhere, the circulation of gifts produces and maintains community, whilst the conversion of gifts to commodities fragments or destroys that same community. However, we are now witnessing the commodification of ideas within the scientific community. Universities and industrial laboratories, which used to produce basic research that was released into 'the public domain' now patent and otherwise protect their research. Discoveries emerge not as contributions but as proprietary ideas for which users must pay a fee, a usury.

[satire]

4. Off topic

If by chance "them's bowls" brings a smile to your face, please contact me. I'd like to catch up. Relentlessly, ljh

[eridani]

5. "This user cannot recieve private messages yet"

"Them's bowls" is a googlewhack for myfishtank.com.

[InkAddict]

6. Holding up three fingers in the ocean of knowledge:

The task of science is to describe and explain the physical world, or more generally, to develop an integrated body of theory that can account for the facts, and predict them. Even such a brief prospectus points toward several reasons why ideas might be treated as gifts, the first being that the task of assembling a mass of disparate facts into a coherent whole clearly lies beyond the powers of a single mind or even a single generation. All such broad intellectual undertakings call for a community of scholars, one in which each individual thinker can be awash in the ideas of his comrades so that a sort of 'group mind' develops, one that is capable of cognitive tasks beyond the powers of any single person. The commerce of ideas--- donated, accepted (or rejected), integrated---constitutes the thinking of such a mind. . . .. 'deas in physics are discussed, presented at meetings, tried out and known to the inner circle of physicists working in the great centers long before they are published in papers and books. . . .' A scientist may conduct his research in solitude, but he cannot do it in isolation. The ends of science require coordination. Each individual's work must 'fit,' and the synthetic nature of gift exchange makes it an appropriate medium for this integration; it is not just people that must be brought together but the ideas themselves.

=========================================

Sounds exactly like the task of HAL, the 2001 "machine" set up to KISS (keep it simple, stupid) by systems analysts and the 'puter geeks with 0s and 1s doing all that "thinking" and "sharing," I worry about the world's lack of the 0s and Xs (spontaneous hugs and kisses)...while not a Luddite, AI has an even greater propensity for evil. Sharing most definitely should have some limits. Some things should NOT be done simply because we can.

Case in point: The significant sharing of demographic/number-crunching GIGO has been set against the people. American corporations are sharing far too much with the likes of Cognizant, Tata, etc...and it isn't such a good idea anymore - their (pronoun purposely ambiguous)goals are mighty suspicious, IMHO. I don't believe those folks have any better "fit" in a world that purports to be seeking peace -the grand global scheme of corporations being domination.

BTW - how does one account for the deaths of all those "sharing" microbiologists? What did we lose when we lost those minds who apparently lost theirs? Were they sharing too much? Not enough? Sharing with the wrong sort of humans?