Message 04205 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 19/27 L18 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] Kula and other comments from Gregers

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:22:24 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Gregers Petersen <gp.ioa> wrote:

I make a note on the official mailing-list, mentioning that using the
"object" Kula in the way it is done in your patch doesn't compile.

Gregers, you have not sent a patch, you have perhaps issued a poorly worded
bug report.

Despite your pretentious you seem to not be able to follow the discussion,
here is what actually happened, as you can verify for yourself in the

You responded to two claims of mine, one that potlach is an example
of a form of non-monetary exchange that was still prone to expansion
and two that money originates in the tribute and prestige exchange, 
I list Kula as an example of a prestige item that is also money.

You claim potlach was not production expanding and claim some amorphous
group of 
uncited anthropologist has has proven that Kula is not money.

I try to get you to elaborate your point, in doing so you ask me some
questions, which
I answer as best I can.

You ask why I think potlach is expansive, I indicate that as far as I know,

returning more that what was recieved as a matter of prestige for the
Beyond explaining that potlach turned "obscene," you ignore the question
further trying to establish the burning question of how many books I have

You ask why I think Kula is money, I say because it is employed by
big men in ritualized exchange, you ask what is a big man, I say a 
form of chief or sub chief, you ask what is a chief, I say a 
chiefdom is transitional stage between kin-communal and state-based
You keep asking questions, and not providing any answers or even analysis.

All the while in answering your questions I hope you will actually make
some sort
coherent argument that helps me to understand your claims, you do not, you
do not even
explain whether my answers are correct or not, instead you only claim that 
anthropologists "know shit" and that I should head to library immediately
to start 
reading every book you list (without citing) and that unless I have studied

Anthopology I should just shut up about it.

The very odd thing is that you never ask me for an explanation about what
Kula is all about? 

Oh please, are you even reading this discussion?

What did I mean when I wrote:

      Kula, IIRC, was used a component of prestige exchange, which "big
      used as part of ritualized circulation. Please explain what you think

      I should know that goes beyond this and how this knowledge would
      my understanding of the origins of money.

You on the other hand, just 'flame around' and deny that you need to
read and understand the manual,

This is completely delusionalon your part, you are the one who is
trying to talk about rank, qualifications, etc.

I have not been "flaming around," this is yet another attempt of yours to
me, my character and my qualifications the subject instead of addressing
the point.

Making accusations and trying to intimidate people will just get you

Are you talking to yourself? I am not trying to intimidate anyone.

You make a very particular mistake in your last sentence (above). You
suddently use the plural tense ('our') - using 'third person' requires
both that you know who you are speaking for and that these people
acknowledge that you have the right to speak on their behalf.

You have descended into complete gibberish.

claiming to be a "Big Man" does not make one a "Big Man".

I have not claimed anything, you are the one who's entire contribution has
geared at establishing your "superior" rank and qualifications.

This ends this discussion.

What discussion?

Lunch With Gregers, Act I:

SCENE: a small cafe, Gregors is sitting at a table, he is approached by a

WAITER: Can I help you sir?

GREGERS: Do you have anything vegetarian for a hungry ANTHROPOLOGIST?

WAITER: Oh, you're a vegetarian, me to, I look after my health, the veggie
burger is pretty good here!

GREGERS: Waiter, I am compelled by your suggestion of the veggie burger,
but at a secret meeting
of brilliant ANTHROPOLOGISTS, it was determined that a vegetarian diet is
not always healthy, what are you talking about?

WAITER: Well, you know, we have the teeth and intestines of a herbivore,
not a carnivore, so we are better suited to eat vegetables.

GREGERS: Waiter, your suggestion of the veggie burger is being undermined
by your allusions to biological deterministic claims, please
tell this ANTHROPOLOGIST where you get your information from!

WAITER: Not sure, actually, I remember this poster at Indian Veg in Chapel
Market, is that wrong?

GREGERS: Waiter, are you doubting the knowledge of ANTHROPOLOGISTS?!

WAITER: No sir, I'm quite interested, is it wrong that vegetables are

GREGERS: Waiter, go to the library at once! Read "From Grains to Grissel,
Dietary Evolution in Neolithic Andorra" written by a GREAT ANTHROPOLOGIST!

WAITER: Umm, ok Sir, so... are you having the veggie burger?

GREGERS: Are you insulting me?! You ADMIT that your knowledge is based
exclusively on a poster you once saw at Indian Veg in Chapel Market and you
expect me, an ANTHROPOLOGIST, to accept your suggestion of a veggie
burger?! You should be fired and banished for such insolence! 

WAITER: Umm, your order Sir?

GREGERS: I'll have the corned beef at once!

Dmytri Kleiner
editing text files since 1981

Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 19/27 L18 [In index]
Message 04205 [Homepage] [Navigation]