Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:10:06 -0500 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Jared's distinctions help me clarify my thinking or at least let me see
more clearly about what I am ignorant. May I extend his analysis? What
about legal drugs (caffeine, nicotine) and the complicated range of other
drugs that are illegal where I live? I am puzzled, for instance, that my
sisters smoked cigarettes since college, while I never took up the
habit. I tried a half-dozen cigarettes and cigars but never could find out
why I should enjoy smoking them (ditto for drinking soft drinks which
always have bored me).
David Fahey
At 07:47 AM 3/29/2005, you wrote:
>The shade of Thorstein Veblen hovers, waiting for an economic sociologist
>to extend The Theory of the Leisure Class into this discussion (as David
>has already done, implicitly). And while I have the floor, briefly, a
>note on the earlier question of why people drink: shouldn't we distinguish
>three forms of the question -- (1) why human beings in general make use of
>the particular forms of intoxicants we call alcoholic and fermented malt
>beverages (etc.) -- meaning, essentially, what are the origins of
>"drinking"? (2) why peoples/ cultures/societies drink (see Heath's
>DRINKING OCCASIONS or examples in MacAndrew and Edgerton DRUNKEN
>COMPORTMENT 1969)? (3) why particular individuals drink (as, e.g.,
>"alcoholics" because they are "alcoholic")? When we ask the question,
>which question are we asking? -- Jared Lobdell
|
|
|