The Scourge of The Dark Side...Tolkien and Modernism

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Hot, crispy nice hobbit

(Economics may be considered the balance of values)

It can indeed! But how do we pick our vocabulary is always a political choice... or at least value-carrying one.

So do we call the equilibrum of values the truth, the right, the peace on earth, God's will, the at last enlightened humankind... or economics...

This world of ours throws economics to our eyes 24/7.

But we're not obliged to use those terms.

Like in the schools the board of education talks of students as "customers" and schools as "providers of educational services" today... Who decided that we should talk that way? We ourselves?

What would have Tolkien thought of that? What if he had been told that he would have to make haste in the university, concentrating only on a narrow field to graduate in minimal time possible to be "efficient" from the point of economics, and not just study all those futile old languages which are not to be turned into instant profit by the markets?

Like I said, that's a question of values...

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

What would have Tolkien thought of that? What if he had been told that he would have to make haste in the university, concentrating only on a narrow field to graduate in minimal time possible to be "efficient" from the point of economics, and not just study all those futile old languages which are not to be turned into instant profit by the markets?

I've read your posts several times over, Nogrod, and I'm not sure if I'm getting the right message from you.

So far I think that you're saying that the rich control the government and the economies, selling old languages for their profits, that guns are bad for society, and Tolkien would dissapprove of this all. I'm a bit confused as you see, could you elaborate on this a little more? I really want to understand what you are saying but I can't make it out (I learn better not visually)

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

What would have Tolkien thought of that? What if he had been told that he would have to make haste in the university, concentrating only on a narrow field to graduate in minimal time possible to be "efficient" from the point of economics, and not just study all those futile old languages which are not to be turned into instant profit by the markets?

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I've read your posts several times over, Nogrod, and I'm not sure if I'm getting the right message from you.

So far I think that you're saying that the rich control the government and the economies, selling old languages for their profits, that guns are bad for society, and Tolkien would dissapprove of this all. I'm a bit confused as you see, could you elaborate on this a little more? I really want to understand what you are saying but I can't make it out (I learn better not visually)

Well, no, that's isn't what Nogrod was saying in the passage you quoted. He was saying that what if Tolkien had been told to be 'successful' at university, and choose a field in which he would have a 'sucessful career' (success in this case translating directly into a large salary -- it's simple economics), rather than wasting time on dead languages and centuries-old stories that no even reads anymore. So, he blows through his classes, gets an MBA in Economics, is hired by the local what-not manufacturer, and devises the means to make more what-nots with non-union workers, and after he breaks the union and lowers wages to below poverty level, he becomes chairman of the board, buries all of England's Lake District in a landfill for the toxic what-nots he's created, is knighted for his success and dies of gout after a long successful career.

And no one will have ever heard of The Lord of the Rings.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

Somehow, much hostility seemed to have sprung from the notion that economics is ammoral and political. To me (or, for that matter, to anyone who has to earn a living), the term has nothing after it other than the necessities of life. Taking this defintion, the term economics would have about just as much meaning to a savage as to a businessman.

But values, however, force people to choose: often between efficiency and equity. Again, that is simple economics... only this time there's a moral (some call political) ring to it. So why not keep things simple?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Hot, crispy nice hobbit

Somehow, much hostility seemed to have sprung from the notion that economics is ammoral and political. To me (or, for that matter, to anyone who has to earn a living), the term has nothing after it other than the necessities of life. Taking this defintion, the term economics would have about just as much meaning to a savage as to a businessman.

But values, however, force people to choose: often between efficiency and equity. Again, that is simple economics... only this time there's a moral (some call political) ring to it. So why not keep things simple?

You have a very quaint view of economics. One would think there were never any Federal Reserve, oil cartels, money devaluations, inflation, stock fraud or market speculations and fluctuations. I think the savage would be scratching his head and asking for his beads back.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

That'd depends on whether you're looking at micro or macro-economics. Orks know the value of a mithril shirt, and its not just because its useful armour.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Well, no, that's isn't what Nogrod was saying in the passage you quoted. He was saying that what if Tolkien had been told to be 'successful' at university, and choose a field in which he would have a 'sucessful career' (success in this case translating directly into a large salary -- it's simple economics), rather than wasting time on dead languages and centuries-old stories that no even reads anymore. So, he blows through his classes, gets an MBA in Economics, is hired by the local what-not manufacturer, and devises the means to make more what-nots with non-union workers, and after he breaks the union and lowers wages to below poverty level, he becomes chairman of the board, buries all of England's Lake District in a landfill for the toxic what-nots he's created, is knighted for his success and dies of gout after a long successful career.

Could you please summerize your view points! Are you saying that modern bussiness people are bad because they seek to gain money and better jobs, while unwillingly destroying things in the process? I am so confused here!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

Could you please summerize your view points! Are you saying that modern bussiness people are bad because they seek to gain money and better jobs, while unwillingly destroying things in the process?

But Groin, summarizing what I just said would be like having to explain the punch line of a joke. Where's the fun in that?

You see, in this case the chicken did not cross the road because it cannot walk. This is because the poultry industry performs debeaking and toe-clipping of the birds and then puts them into tiny cages 16-18 inches wide with 5 or 6 birds crammed into each cage.

Debeaking is a painful procedure whereby the bird’s sensitive beak is sliced off with a hot blade. Poultry meat and egg producers that use battery cages and crowded floor systems remove one-half to two-thirds of the birds’ beaks to discourage cannibalistic pecking, a behavior that occurs when birds are kept in close confinement with no regard for their natural behaviors. Behavioral studies indicate that debeaked birds are often unable to eat, drink, and preen properly. They also exhibit behaviors associated with chronic pain and depression.

Toe-clipping is the amputation of a bird’s toes just behind the claw. This painful procedure is performed to reduce claw-related injuries on factory farms.

In conclusion, the only way the chicken will cross the road is via a truck, cut up into bite size chunks for mass-consumption at your local McDonalds.

See? The joke loses much of its humor in translation.