drsomebody wrote:champ33 wrote: I doubt whether most people who dismiss others for not following convention are thinking along the lines you are. It's more likely they're slipping comfortably into the manipulation prone system.
Oh, I'm sure that they're not explicitly thinking of things that way. Normative systems work "best" when they are least noticed. The stodgy old boss who refuses to hire a "dirty hippie" for not cutting his hair isn't thinking about limiting and channeling the reproduction of power through physical control of the bodies of others, but that's exactly what he's doing. The homology between the law and appropriate dress almost certainly isn't consciously connected in the minds of adcom members and potential employers, but I suspect it's still subconsciously present. Foucault's entire body of work is based around these sorts of premises (a body of work that IMHO has huge and largely misunderstood implications for legal studies).
So if you 'ironically' dress 'appropriately' are you gaming the system, are you reinforcing it, or is it a combination of the two?kwhitegocubs wrote: But why should there be social distinctions?
When you have a solid answer for that question please do tell me! It's been vexing social theorists for thousands of years.
I like the way that you think, however I never implied that those following the system were consciously doing so. Maybe I should have said 'unconsciously slipping'. I was trying to remark, though, that those striving for some kind of justice in the role of lawyer, while following social norms of attire and whatever else, should make themselves painfully and consistently aware that justice relies on realities that transcend and provide the foundation for those norms. A little long-winded sorry...