resources

[keryx]

I talked to a guy at work awhile ago who has a peeve I admire - he can't stand it when we talk about "resources" instead of "people". Because "resources" assumes that work gets done in this abstract way, without the feelings and rhythms that we associate with ourselves. Since we're actually more like others than unlike them, it's smarter to think of work being done by, basically, ourselves.

This seems like a central part of the problem anywhere people get themselves into conflict. CEOs fuck over workers because they're thinking about "resources". Wars linger and we take sides in part because we think of casualties (wounded or dead resources) or consider the enemy in abstract. Pretty much every internet argument that ever turned into name-calling at some point stumbled over another person as a user (resource who isn't currently working) instead of a person.

How did we get so good at abstraction in the first place?

Comments

[wild-irises.livejournal.com]

Well, yes.

And ... owners were fucking over workers long before this kind of abstraction was popular. The dehumanization of the "other" dates back well into recorded history. Try Greece. Or feudal Japan.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

I think that's the same basic abstraction - I mean, the language has changed, but the concept is essential the same.

[snidegrrl.livejournal.com]

word.