I am interested in the concept of interdependence in terms of the relationships were form with one another. It means that
no member of a relationship is a dependant to one another, but rather are both ecnomically self sufficient from one another.In an interdependent relationship, all participants are emotionally, economically, ecologically and/or morally self-reliant while at the same time responsible to each other.
Karl Marks states that interdependence is a choice that only independent people can make (dependent people do not have the free choice to enter into an interdependent relationship), and the participants are generally able to produce more together than either person would be able to produce separately.
Much of our world is gripped with a sense of fear and insecurity—fear of losing jobs, homes, or our future. In such a state of insecurity and vulnerability, it is easy to see why people might resign to being in survival mode and looking out only for themselves, at home, at work or in the community. In this environment people tend to respond by being more and more independent. The mindset becomes: “I’m going to focus on ‘me and mine.’
Certainly, independence is vital; however, the problem is that we live in an interdependent reality. Our most important work, the problems we hope to solve or the opportunities we hope to realize require working and collaborating with other people in a high-trust, synergistic way—whether at home or at work. Having an interdependent mindset, skills and tools are vital, especially now as we work through challenges unlike anything most of us have ever seen in our life time. Stephen Covey
From Independence and Interdependence to the Pluralism of Property
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1602017
Get your head around that.. cheers
I personally like Margaret Thatcher's quote " There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families." < http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher#Third_term_as_Prime_Minister >.
Although this is an extreme statement (and I personally wouldn't go that far) I think the underlying point she makes is valid. When we start looking at some kind of dependence (including interdependence) as the building block of society freedom is a necessary casualty. The starting point of dependence necessarily crowds out autonomy of the individual (and family unit) and invites tyranny from those whose judgement is used to regulate the levels of dependance that they see fit to impose. A so called synthesis of the values of freedom and dependence (ie. interdependence) does not resolve this conflict.
While in practical terms freedom of this kind is a fiction I still think it's an important idealogical starting point for building the greatest freedoms possible into a society. I would qualify it only by adding that personal autonomy should be limited, but only to the extent that it impinges on the autonomy of another.
When creating laws and regulations, and even taxes for that matter, there is a fundamental difference between asking 'how can we protect the freedom of a person?' and 'how can we protect the (inter)dpendence of a person?' I know what I'd prefer.
itsandrew
Go as far as you can see and you will see further.
I beleive the most precious thing in the universe is not the love between husband and wife (Often termed reciprical, and short lived), but the love between parent and child (Unconditional and on-going). I think family structures should focus on the relationship of greatest importance as being this relationship over all others. Typically in our culture we dont, we tend to have this ideology mindset that the relationship
of greatest importance is husband and wife.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
