A sometimes useful reminder

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I believe the proper term for a large grouping of fluff and wank is known as a "Fappery".

Aha! So that's what that word means!

[LMNO]

I dunno, I just made it up.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I dunno, I just made it up.

Well, it sounds right.

[LMNO]

Such is the magnificence contained within me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Such is the magnificence contained within me.

[LMNO]

Whoops.  That's actually one of Nigel's dildoes.  Still, pretty magnificent.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Whoops.  That's actually one of Nigel's dildoes.  Still, pretty magnificent.

[navkat]

I sat on the quote in the OP for a few days, but I still find that it makes no sense, I think perhaps because I'm missing some context.

Thanks for saying it first. I thought I was just dumber than everybody.

[navkat]

I think the quote is trying to say, "you can't blame 'society' for the actions of an individual," but I could be wrong.

That's not accurate, either.  While people ARE responsible for their individual actions, to say that society has no role in their behavior is also silly.

People are far too eager to give the credit or the blame to one individual, because A) it's simpler, and B) they don't have to share in the culpability, and C) they get to feel outraged and self-righteous.

And Roger is smarter.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I think the quote is trying to say, "you can't blame 'society' for the actions of an individual," but I could be wrong.

That's not accurate, either.  While people ARE responsible for their individual actions, to say that society has no role in their behavior is also silly.

People are far too eager to give the credit or the blame to one individual, because A) it's simpler, and B) they don't have to share in the culpability, and C) they get to feel outraged and self-righteous.

And Roger is smarter.

No, just more cynical.

[navkat]

Societies are not unitary.  They are not social systems (closed or open); they are not totalities.  We never find a single bounded society in geographical or social space.  Because there is no system, no totality, there cannot be "sub-systems", "dimensions" or "levels" of such a totality.  Because there is no whole, social relations cannot be reduced to "ultimately," "in the last instance," to some systemic property of it – like the "mode of material production," or the "cultural" or "normative system," or the "form of military organization."  Because there is no bounded totality, it is not helpful to divide social change or conflict into "endogenous" and "exogenous" varieties.  Because there is no social system, there is no "evolutionary" process within it.  Because humanity is not divided into a series of bounded totalities, "diffusion" of social organization does not occur between them.  Because there is no totality, individuals are not constrained in their behaviour by "social structure as a whole" and so it is not helpful to make a distinction between "social action" and "social structure".

Just in case you forgot.

Using the context provided by others in this thread, I would say that trends and memes which enter the "social consciousness" are powerful influencers of thought and behavior. To deny this would be just as naive as saying the media and advertisers have no sway over popular awareness.

It's not just what they obscure which serves as mind-control, but also the soundbites and watchwords they push into our subconscious to coerce us into collective behavior patterns.

The natural state of man is, to some degree, to follow cues within the herd. If all the zebras just start collectively running in one direction, it's subconscious common sense that you'd better run thatta way too because there's probably a cheetah hanging around.

That doesn't mean we don't also posses in our nature the instinct to resist and rebel, it just means we *are* sort of bound by loose threads to a hierarchy of "tribes."