Social folkways, etiquette, and nonconformity

[EmergingAlbert]

I have read and heard a lot about INTP's and misunderstanding of social folkways. I can totally relate to this idea. I have always despised the idea of having to conform to manmade rules in order to be liked, accepted, or respected.

Now, don't get me wrong, I understand that society needs certain rules to operate correctly. I'm not talking about morals. Morals are great (don't kill people, don't lie, don't hurt others, etc.). Contrary to what some people perceive of me, I actually like and care about most people, and I would never want to hurt someone. Kindness is a virtue that I hold in high regard. I'm all for helping and comforting others and not hurting others.

What I have a problem with is traditional social folkways and etiquette. Some of it makes sense to me, but very little. For example, it is considered disrespectful to wear a hat at the dinner table. There is no inherent meaning to wearing a hat except that it is a garment you wear on your head for comfort, style, and/or convenience. Hats were not invented to be a sign of disrespect.

Do you see the difference here? Yes, you should always be kind to others and do your best not to hurt them. Virtues such as honesty, integrity, kindness, faithfulness, and love have value in and of themselves. But why must society invent all these extra rules? Going back to my hat example, if the rule "Don't wear a hat at the dinner table" was never established, nobody would ever perceive wearing a hat at the dinner table to be offensive or disrespectful. But someone apparently decided one day, "Hey, I want to be offended when people wear hats at the dinner table, and I want everybody else to think the same way, so I'm going to make this a rule so that people will have to put forth more effort to be perceived as decent people. Let's just make life more complicated by adding a bunch of stupid rules to it!"

Does anybody else feel this way about social folkways? I feel that this is very much an INTP characteristic. Vote in my poll. If there are any other rules that you think are stupid, feel free to reply and elaborate.

 

[ElvenVeil]

There is no poll
(btw I will look at your poem tomorrow, simply too tired for it now )

 

[EmergingAlbert]

Just finished the poll!

 

[Jesse]

I don't really care. Most social norms come from a logical background or at least have some history. Most are just nice to do, for instance greeting someone when you first meet them, saying goodbye ect. There are some illogical ones but they originated ages ago and are just polite to do nowdays.

For why hats used to be important.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071126045538AAadmaJ

I could bitch and whine about it being illogical that I am expected to take my hat of but at worst you come of as an arsehole and best you come of as unique.


All those etiquette rules I am fine with. I guess I just want people to be polite.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

Jesse, I do recognize that most of these rules ORIGINATED from a logical basis, but everything has changed so much since then, they are now outdated. Since society has progressed, you would think these folkways would become irrelevant. Yet so many people walk around like mindless sheep following these rules like they're still living in the 1500s.

I guess I'd rather come off as a unique a--hole who actually thinks things through logically than a mindless sheep who's nice not because of genuine kindness but because he's supposed to act that way.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Kindness is preferable when sincere, but I'll take either.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I don't like expectational etiquette. What do I mean by that? Well..

Either something is required or it is not. If it is, fine, I will choose whether or not I will have my business there.

If something is not required I don't see any reason at all why I should conform to expectations, it doesn't make any sense. If the purpose is to show compliance, why can't the expectations just be made into a rule? I will consider following it then.

To me it's just plain nonsense to have power struggles over who can curry the most favor, gain the most influence and gather the most allies.

 

[Jesse]

Dress according to the establishment you're visiting.

This is not really etiquette. It's consumerism and capitalism.

Don't wear a hat indoors/at the dinner table.

Kind of ridiculous. You are right here.

Don't pass gas in the presence of others. If you do, apologize or excuse yourself.

Do I have to explain why this a good rule?

Regard all elders as your superiors.

Consider it just means to show respect, I think I try to do this to everyone not just old people.

Say "please" before making a request of someone.

Is this etiquette or just being nice?

Don't put your elbows on the table.

I don't follow this rule except when eating out. You do it to show interest with who you eating with.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

SpaceYeti, that is the exact reason that social folkways annoy me so much. Most people do it as a form of compliance, having no sincere reason for doing it. For example, if someone says to me, "Hello, how are you?" because they sincerely want to know how I'm doing, that is a truly kind gesture that I can respect. However, if they say that just out of social conformity, but they really don't give a crap how I'm doing (i.e., they just want me to say, "I'm fine"), I'd rather them not even bother to greet me in the first place. I would rather be completely ignored than shown insincere or fake kindness.

ESC, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

 

[notrightnow]

I don't want to smell someones ass emanations so I find that one appropriate. The elders thing I voted as the stupidest. I absolutely respect the accumulated knowledge and wisdom of elders but also pay them the respect of viewing them as equal humans. They are neither inherently superior or inferior to anyone else of any age.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

Just saw your response, Jesse.

As for the first rule, I agree that it is very much influenced by capitalism and consumerism. However, I consider it etiquette because many people end up getting offended because of the way you dress in a certain establishment, which I think is ridiculous.

The third rule does have validity, and I try not to fart in front of my girlfriend, for example, but what I find dumb is that you have to apologize for it after you do it. Why do I have to say "pardon me" or "excuse me" after I burp or fart? It's like saying, "I apologize for performing a natural bodily function. From now on, I pledge not to ever relieve myself again." I get that farts stink, and like I said, I don't intentionally let out stinky farts unless I'm cutting up with my guy friends, but hey, you gotta do what you gotta do! Human beings pass gas. Get over it.

As for number four, I do believe that you should respect those who deserve it and be kind to everyone, but many people in my region (it's kind of a cultural thing) think that elders deserve to be unconditionally respected just because they're older. I respect people based on their character, not the number of years they've lived. Age is not a choice, so why should we show any type of merit in age? I respect a 17-year-old who has saved hundreds of lives and treats everyone kindly and gives most of his money to the homeless much more than a 60-year-old who is always grumpy, cheated on his wife, and beat his children.

As for number five, I don't understand the meaning of "please." Seriously...how do you define it? What's the real difference between saying, "Take out the trash" and "Please take out the trash"? You're saying the same thing. You're telling them to take out the trash. You're not offering anything in return or offering any options. You've just added a random five-letter word that supposedly makes everything "nicer."

 

[EmergingAlbert]

NRN, I'm totally with you about elders. Wisdom and knowledge are some of the qualities that I respect the most, and I really enjoy being with elders who have accumulated those things. But I don't think you're superior to me just because you're older.

Again, I get that farts stink, and I do try to avoid it to an extent, but I'm not going to put the effort of my entire life just to hold in a fart. It may not even stink. And when I say "pass gas," I mean both farting and burping. Burps don't even stink (at least not usually), so what's the big deal?

 

[warryer]

I can understand please. It is an acknowledgement of humanity.

Take out the trash. Carries with it the connotation of being a command to somebody of less status. You don't have to be all prim and proper with somebody "below" you.

The addition of please makes me much more willing because it carries a degree of respect with it. No I am not some animal that is here to do your bidding, I have my own agenda thank you.

That's what social etiquette is about: showing respect.

Now you are right in saying that blindly following these is NOT the way. It really should be based on one's character.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

That's an interesting way of putting it, warryer. I wouldn't be offended if someone just said, "Take out the trash." I think that's a pretty neutral statement, with no addition of status. On the other hand, if someone said, "Take out the trash, stupid child," THAT would offend me. Something negative was added to it to make it offensive. If someone said something like, "Take out the trash, my wonderful love," then I would find that to be positive. But just plain old "Take out the trash" seems completely neutral to me because you're not expressing anything other than the fact that you want the person you're addressing to take out the trash.

 

[^_\\]

"Hi."
"Good, how are you?"

"How are you"
"Yeah, good to see you."

"sup"
"sup"

And not one eyelid was batted.

edit: deleted off topic stuff.

 

[cheese]

EA,
imo "Please" makes the statement more of a request than a demand.

"Take the trash out" = I am telling you to do something.
"Please take the trash out" = I am requesting that you do something, and I recognise you are not mine to command as my body is.

Makes a world of difference when one is addressing someone of different status.

The best option is probably to ask, instead of to affix 'please' to it, because that makes it clear that it's a request rather than a polite order. Tone of voice is also important here. It's about respecting the boundaries of your power. Status, hierarchy and power are all important social concepts, and they inform behaviour to a large extent. "Being nice" means recognising the extent of your power, and not imposing on another, ie not trying to take over their territory (mental, emotional, physical). You see this in chimp societies. The alpha and others of high rank can make demands (for food, service and sex) but it doesn't work the other way round. So if someone of the same rank as you treats you in a way one would treat one of lesser rank, it's offensive. It's tantamount to aggression - like taking someone's banana from them. (This all sounded better in my head.)

Basically, some etiquette is simply about not overstepping your bounds. In language it's a little harder to see as territorial instincts are represented symbolically rather than shown literally, but it all goes back to having and protecting your own spot of land, and respecting/not trying to take over others'.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

^_\\, I fail to see how your post about violence is relevant to this thread...

cheese, I think a request would be, "Will you take out the trash?" In that case, you're giving them an option. They can say, "Yes, I will!" and take out the trash. They are also free to say, "No. Do it yourself." They could also say, "Yes, but maybe later." Changing an imperative command to an interrogative request changes the entire meaning of the sentence. The addition of the word "please" to either form of the sentence doesn't change the meaning in essence.

While I do understand what you're saying about rank and power, but don't you think that's a bit irrelevant to 21st century advanced humans? We're not living in a feudal system anymore, and we're certainly not monkeys. As I said earlier, you would think that as society has progressed, many of these rules would become irrelevant.

 

[ElvenVeil]

huh.. so far this poll surprises me..
'Regard all elders as your superiors.'
and
'Say "please" before making a request of someone.'

these are the two things I would say that derives from a completly reasonable standpoint. therefore I wonder why 'Regard all elders as your superiors' is in the lead.
I can't rule out that it is being misinterpret since it says that elders are not your superiors and not 'respect the elderly' which is the real version of it, is it not ?
at any rate, I think the idea simple comes from a thought that the older people has had no more time to gather knowledge and experience.. therefore it would make sense to listen to them (respecting their advices) as they after all has a lot more experience than the younger people.. So I can't hepl but feel that there is something wrong when that one is in the lead

 

[EmergingAlbert]

While all of these rules usually have some form of a logical basis, that doesn't make them logical in and of themselves. Yes, it does make sense that most older people will have more wisdom and experience than most younger people, this is not always the case, so there is a hole in that logic. I think the rule should be "Respect those who deserve respect," and age should have nothing to do with it. Respect should be granted on the basis of wisdom, character, and virtue, which may or may not come with age.

 

[GottabeKB]

I voted for "don't put your elbows on the table" as the stupidest social etiquette. Social etiquette is completely built upon respect for other human beings. Now some are more ridiculous than others but I think for the most part most of these social norms or etiquettes are forms of respect for another. Whether the respect is warranted is the real question. I think that putting my elbows on the table is the stupidest social norm because I don't see how it doesn't show respect. Another poster said that when you don't have your elbows on the table you are showing you're interested in your eating partner. What if you don't have an eating partner? Also I can listen just fine with my elbows on the table. This is one of those norms that I think has been built up over hundreds of years but as for today has no real merit. Another one is like it: the don't wear your hats indoors/at the table. The apologizing for passing gas is kind of ridiculous because as you said Albert, it is a natural bodily function. However all the other ones have definite merit and I think should be followed:
-Dress according to the establishment you're visiting: how would you like it if somebody showed up to your business meeting in swimshorts and a T-shirt?

-Regard all elders as your superiors: everyone else already took the words out of my mouth for this explanation

-Say "please" before making a request of someone: As others have said, a request is made when saying "please do ___", while a command is made when saying "do this". Why do you think "Go fall down some stairs" sounds more forceful than "Please go fall down some stairs". Its simply how the English language is built. There are of course alternatives to please as well to signify a request rather than a command: "Could you do this?", "Would you be able to do this?" Rather than implying you are superior to the person you talk to, you can say these things and respect is gained because you don't perceive them as being inferior to you but respect them as being an equal to yourself.

Maybe its just me being a Canuck which causes me to regard social etiquette higher than the OP seems to. We say sorry for everything, especially when it wasn't our fault! I just do it out of habit now and I don't really care either way. I think its a good habit because it shows your concern for the other person.
C'mon use some more Fe! That is pretty much the basis for social etiquette as far as I know.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

You say you do it out of habit and don't care either way, but it's a good habit. I don't see how it's good if you don't care either way and you're not really doing it out of real respect for someone, then what's the point? Just to give people a false sense of being respected?

You know, I think the biggest problem I have with these norms is not necessarily the norms themselves. I actually follow some of them on occasion. The biggest problem I have is that everyone is expected to follow them, and if they don't follow them, they are perceived as rude. For example, I do sometimes say "please" in combination with a request, and I certainly don't mind if someone else does the same for me. But if I don't say it, sometimes people will get offended and expect me to say "please," or else they won't do me the favor I ask.

I just hate the whole attitude of conformity. "If you don't do things the way the general public does them and has done them for hundreds of years, then you're less of a person than those who do." It's maddening.

 

[GottabeKB]

You say you do it out of habit and don't care either way, but it's a good habit. I don't see how it's good if you don't care either way and you're not really doing it out of real respect for someone, then what's the point? Just to give people a false sense of being respected?

Ok lets say someone bumps into you but you were moving at the same time and it is somewhat ambiguous whether he/she hit you or you hit them though it is more likely in their ball court than in yours. In that case I would say sorry to give them the benefit of the doubt. I don't know for sure whether he/she did bump into me or I into him/her but I'll say sorry just in case. So I guess in some ways its simply because of the ambiguity of the situation. Its giving the other person respect even though you are not sure they deserve it because in the end that will help to mull the situation over. Call me a pansy but I don't really enjoy conflict all that much when it has to do with physical things. If we're going to have a conflict about what you said or what I said then I'm all for it, but I think its silly to make something big out of something that wasn't intended in the first place. Basically I say sorry to avoid misunderstandings.

You know, I think the biggest problem I have with these norms is not necessarily the norms themselves. I actually follow some of them on occasion. The biggest problem I have is that everyone is expected to follow them, and if they don't follow them, they are perceived as rude. For example, I do sometimes say "please" in combination with a request, and I certainly don't mind if someone else does the same for me. But if I don't say it, sometimes people will get offended and expect me to say "please," or else they won't do me the favor I ask.

Again, probably the reason why these people get offended when you don't say please when making a request, it is perceived as a command. Thus you are subjecting yourself over them, making them feel inferior. Think of it like a slave driver who says "Row harder". Now do you really want to follow that? Probably not. People don't want to conform to commands that are unprecedented, especially INTPs. They don't allow a choice in the matter. Without free choice a person is devoid of their humanity, making them like a robot that you can command to do whatever you want. Don't you think that the golden rule (do to others as you would have them do to you) is a good rule regardless of your religious preferences? If you want to have freedom of choice for doing something, don't you think others should receive that same freedom?

 

[ElvenVeil]

While all of these rules usually have some form of a logical basis, that doesn't make them logical in and of themselves. Yes, it does make sense that most older people will have more wisdom and experience than most younger people, this is not always the case, so there is a hole in that logic. I think the rule should be "Respect those who deserve respect," and age should have nothing to do with it. Respect should be granted on the basis of wisdom, character, and virtue, which may or may not come with age.

Because it is not a universal rule , doesn't mean that it is flawed. As it can be applied to a broad majority (assuming we are talking a certain difference in age) . Anyway , we may be able to debate whether it is flawed or not, it is not really the point I am making =p . I am saying that it hits me as strange that one of the statements with the easiest logical bagground (respect the elder) can come in the lead concidering that the INTP would be a type that concidered logic to be above else. Therefore a statement that has a rationale that is easily approached should , as far as I can see, have a smaller chance of being picked out, than one of the completly stupid ones (elbows on the table)

you see where I am going? I wonder if it is just an unconscious reaction to being bossed around as it suggests when it names the elder people your superiors

 

[EmergingAlbert]

I do prefer to have a choice and given a request over a command. I just don't see how saying "please" is making it a request. It's still an imperative sentence. If you say "Please take out the trash," you're still commanding them to take out the trash. You're not giving them the option not to take out the trash, as you would be if you said "Will you take out the trash?"

 

[GottabeKB]

Yeah actually I thought about this as I was writing my last post but I just wanted to get to the bottom of my argument without any distractions. You're absolutely right about "Please take out the trash" still being a command. However it is a softer command only because of the word please. This is simply modern culture attaching meaning to the word please in an imperative sentence. "Please do your homework" sounds nicer than "Do your homework". I think that in the former the person applying this quote is appealing to a person to do their homework, while in the latter it is an outright command with no question in the matter, if you do not comply perhaps their will be downright beatings to happen. Basically it depends on the situation, the way in which it was said, etc. for the word please to sound nicer or more polite than a simple command.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I prefer commands. Nice & direct.

 

[cheese]

cheese, I think a request would be, "Will you take out the trash?" In that case, you're giving them an option. They can say, "Yes, I will!" and take out the trash. They are also free to say, "No. Do it yourself." They could also say, "Yes, but maybe later." Changing an imperative command to an interrogative request changes the entire meaning of the sentence. The addition of the word "please" to either form of the sentence doesn't change the meaning in essence.

While I do understand what you're saying about rank and power, but don't you think that's a bit irrelevant to 21st century advanced humans? We're not living in a feudal system anymore, and we're certainly not monkeys. As I said earlier, you would think that as society has progressed, many of these rules would become irrelevant.

Heh, no, not irrelevant at all. The business, social and political worlds all revolve around hierarchy, connections, territory, not stepping on people's toes, etc. I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're not monkeys'. There are differences between us and the great apes, but there are also substantial similarities, and what I meant to point out was our inherited tendencies (territorialism, power exchange systems, hierarchies, etc) which are mirrored in primate societies we can observe today.

Of course the power game isn't always at the forefront of interaction, and sometimes it's hardly relevant, partly because our interaction is somewhat more complex. But it's also partly because people are careful to pay attention to the rules which ensure no one's triggers are set off. Anger, hurt, jealousy - all of which stem from one's territory/belongings being misused or misappropriated. This is easier to understand if you start to see one's sense of self, one's partner, one's free time, one's decisions, one's opinion/'truths' and so on, as territory. (This is why when people quarrel they will often start putting out *territorial displays/signs of strength even if it's over something like politics, which isn't tangibly owned by anyone in particular.)

Generally people wouldn't order their bosses around, but wouldn't be surprised to have their boss order them around in their areas of authority. Employees are careful to pander somewhat to the boss's whims - signs of respect and deference, overt politeness - and are often less so with their underlings. Dinners with colleagues are less tense than dinners with superiors or mixed dinners. The concept of 'sucking up' wouldn't exist without power structures, and neither would the idea of 'bossiness', and neither would the idea of rising above hierarchy by knowing you always have control over your own mind and will. Novels wouldn't be written exploring dystopian worlds where even this freedom is taken away. People are aggressive about defending their rights, the same way animals are aggressive about defending their space.

So anyway, back to politeness....this lowers the amount of aggression present in order to keep society smooth-running. Bossiness shows attempted dominance, but politeness shows equality or even subservience. Most people don't want to be dominated unless necessary (eg in an already-established structure), and attempts to do so will ruffle their feathers and increase the amount of aggression present, perhaps enough to precipitate a fight. This is generally counter-productive to your aims.
Plus, a lot of people aren't aggressive anyway, and like being nice to each other so that everyone's happy. They don't want to dominate, and seeing happiness sets off the empathy-meter/mirror neurons and makes them happy as well. Plus being nice increases the chance of your request being fulfilled. So politeness is in everyone's best interests.

If your problem is only with the word 'please', that's something you'll have to fight the rest of the world for. You might as well argue about the definition of 'triangle'. 'Please' represents all those things mentioned above to everyone because that is the meaning attached to it, and the meaning of a sign is determined by the majority's interpretation of that sign. 'Please' signals good stuff, and if you don't use it, you're simply not signalling good stuff. There isn't really any point arguing, unless you don't believe in being careful around other people's space.

I will agree that it's not as good as requesting in question-form, though. But that also has to do with tone of voice, facial expression, body language, and so on. If you ask someone to do something with a please but are shouting in a sarcastic manner and gesturing wildly you're not likely to send a non-aggressive message. However, if you tell someone in the nicest way possible to do something, it's still a command, and has none of the mitigation 'please' provides, which, through its very signalling of careful tip-toeing (ie politeness), at the very least provides a smidgeon of acknowledgement that you are not a slave to be commanded, but have the right to refuse the request. The sentence itself doesn't have to be formulated as a question for the respect of personal rights/space/territory/whatever to be communciated. (Ah, finally! That's my point. It took too long.)

*puffing out the chest, spreading the limbs wide to literally take over greater space (FBI agents are trained to stand with their legs further apart in order to look more intimidating, as strength/power is unconsciously associated with the amount you feel free to take up [ie this isn't the same as fat people who hunch into themselves but still take up an equivalent amount of space]), clenching the fists to prepare for a fight (why do you think we get angry at all? It's because we feel threatened when our territory is threatened, and we need the adrenaline to defend our belongings, and our status - which is particularly important in order that we have enough clout to defend our belongings if we lack strength.)
Those that are on the losing side of an argument will tend to take on defensive but defiant postures which are a mixture of aggressive and defeated; those who know they are wrong will lower the head which represents deference but also covering of the vulnerable neck, hunch into themselves in order to appear smaller and more subservient (also in an unconscious attempt to 'disappear'), might take a few steps back, close their legs, etc.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

What you said makes sense, cheese, but I don't really know how to respond due to my current mental fatigue. I'm kind of tired of debating this topic now anyway...I'm ready to start something new. Not tonight though...I'm too tired. I'm sure I'll be back tomorrow, ready for another stimulating conversation with my fellow INTP's.

 

[GottabeKB]

I prefer commands. Nice & direct.

Shutup EyeSeeCold!

 

[GottabeKB]

Isn't it interesting that many disparaging remarks, like above^ , are commands?
"Please shut up" just eliminates all angst and harshness. So I prefer harsh sayings to be commands

The Celebrity Jeopardy parody comes to mind with 'Sean Connery' giving insults towards the gameshow host Alex Trebek : "Suck it Trebek!"
The humour would be somewhat lost if he said "Please suck it Trebek"

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Isn't it interesting that many disparaging remarks, like above^ , are commands?
"Please shut up" just eliminates all angst and harshness. So I prefer harsh sayings to be commands

The Celebrity Jeopardy parody comes to mind with 'Sean Connery' giving insults towards the gameshow host Alex Trebek : "Suck it Trebek!"
The humour would be somewhat lost if he said "Please suck it Trebek"

Yes, the qualifier "Please" negates the attitude of the action.

"Please" is such a qualifier that one admits powerlessness to the object in question. Without a qualifier such as "please" one declares their arbitrary right to some amount of control.

"Please" may not work when the object embraces arbitrary power(i.e. abuse).
A direct command may not work when the object acknowledges self-power.

For example:

Shutup EyeSeeCold!

no u

 

[MissQuote]

Do you see the difference here? Yes, you should always be kind to others and do your best not to hurt them. Virtues such as honesty, integrity, kindness, faithfulness, and love have value in and of themselves. But why must society invent all these extra rules? Going back to my hat example, if the rule "Don't wear a hat at the dinner table" was never established, nobody would ever perceive wearing a hat at the dinner table to be offensive or disrespectful. But someone apparently decided one day, "Hey, I want to be offended when people wear hats at the dinner table, and I want everybody else to think the same way, so I'm going to make this a rule so that people will have to put forth more effort to be perceived as decent people. Let's just make life more complicated by adding a bunch of stupid rules to it!"

I haven't read any other replys yet, so perhaps someone else has said this stuff already, I want to reply though while my mind is still fresh on this and not swiriling around with everyone elses ideas.

I think a lot of seemingly meanigless things can be explained better when you try to look at the underlying roots of the idea.

about hats you said

"There is no inherent meaning to wearing a hat except that it is a garment you wear on your head for comfort, style, and/or convenience. Hats were not invented to be a sign of disrespect."

I would consider this a very modern, and nearsighted, veiw. I would also agree that if the way you explained it was the full depth of the case then it is indeed a ridiculous idea to adhere to.

When I was reading all of this though, all these speculative thoughts about why a rule like this would be came up in my mind. Bear with me a bit, as I am only theorizing off of the top of my head (yay puns) and certianly haven't researched at all to give any real examples.

Hats are, obviously, a very old article of apparel. They are also useful, and in the past I imagine they were worn initially for reasons beyond just fashion. I am sure the first person who ever pulled a piece of material over their head likely did so to break the wind or cold. Eventually someone came up with a way of fashioning a sort of hood onto their cloak type garment to save the hassle. Now one of the great things about a hood is the ability to use it to hide yourself in a way. I'll get back to that. Another thing hats can be useful to protect against sun, but I am sure the ancients, just like most of us wouldn't want to wear a coat in the heat, didn't want to go around wearing their cloaks all summer just for the sake of a little shade. So someone oneday came up with a way to have this great head gear that was completely detached from any other clothing articles, and somewhere amongst all of this was the birth of the hat.

Now along the line goes history and groups of people begin to become larger and larger, the larger our groups get the easier survival becomes, and with more time on our hands we begin to see things in more aesthetic terms, this happens right around the same time we are really learning to hone our craft of creating things. We begin to decorate and adorn ourselves for beauty as well as function, around this same time within the larger groups there is a need for order and a hierarchy begins to arise. With a hierarchy there is a need to identify who is who, and of course the head, if not being the first thing one notices, it is certianly one of the things on another person looked at most. Putting two and two (or three or four or whatever) together, it seems like a pretty good idea to put some sort of mark, perferably an attrative one, on the head gear of the people in charge.

Another thing larger groups of people creates is thicker and thicker competetion between rival groups. And with that rivalry comes the need to protect ones own from more than just the elements. We need to organize even greater now and we need to recognize our own and our leaders imediately. We need to be different from those other people but have an affinity with eachother. We need armor, we need helmets.

Enough about hats, what about the dinner table. Where we break our bread with our kin. The table is a place of solace and comfort. It is also a place communication and peacemaking. Where everyone should be on as equal ground as possible.

Functions of hats-

-Protection
-status symbols

Following this whole line of thought, to wear a hat to a table would have, at least in the past, perhaps implyed mistrust, dishonesty, a belief that one was better than others, and in the case of a hood, secrecy and a desire to hide or escape. It would be to disrespect both guests and host.

Does any this mean we should still adhere to a rule like this? I have no clue. But I am sure I have left a lot out, and I am sure that most other weird social customs can be rooted back to something completely reasonable at some point, though you may have to dig deep.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

Following this whole line of thought, to wear a hat to a table would have, at least in the past, perhaps implyed mistrust, dishonesty, a belief that one was better than others, and in the case of a hood, secrecy and a desire to hide or escape. It would be to disrespect both guests and host.

Does any this mean we should still adhere to a rule like this? I have no clue. But I am sure I have left a lot out, and I am sure that most other weird social customs can be rooted back to something completely reasonable at some point, though you may have to dig deep.

These last two paragraphs are basically my point. I am aware that some social customs were logical centuries ago. However, because things have changed (e.g., we no longer live under a feudal system, hats are now a fashion item, etc.), I feel that these old social customs have become obsolete, and see no purpose of living in the past and following them like we're still living in the dark ages.

 

[RobdoR]

It's interesting how many people don't like to defer to their elders. Teenage angst perhaps? Most old people (including parents) are way smarter than we give them credit for. The thing about old people is that they are usually right.

 

[Jennywocky]

It's interesting how many people don't like to defer to their elders. Teenage angst perhaps? Most old people (including parents) are way smarter than we give them credit for. The thing about old people is that they are usually right.

Yeah, I think the "rule" offered was kind of vague and/or misstated, which is kind of the issue with the whole topic for me... seemingly just a gripe about the social rules under the assumption they are all arbitrary or serve no purpose.

I don't regard my elders as "superiors" in that they are better than me.

However, I think it's wise to listen to people who have more life experience than me without just rejecting them out of hand because they're elders;

my parents put a lot of effort into raising me and made sacrifices for me and I was entirely dependent on them when young, even if they did screw things up;

and it makes sense just out of self-survival to understand that, because my job gives me a paycheck, I need to actually accept my boss's power over me even if I can disagree with my boss's ideas and make a case for something else.

(A lot of this thread DOES come across as teenage angst... or at least someone is getting nagged by authority figures to follow certain rules and is getting sick of it.)

I also don't think we're in the "dark ages" because people are expected to not fart loudly and/or apologize when they do so. Now I'm trying to stifle laughter at work, imaginining an important dinner party where everyone in their finery is cutting the cheese loudly, in all different ways, and otherwise pretending not to notice. [uh... sorry, cheese.]

Now that I said that... didn't the dark ages allow people to fart openly? I'm not sure. Some cultures, it's not a big deal; personally, I'd rather not deal with it. What's next? Expectations to shower and groom will be considered dark ages (even though ironically bathing only happened irregularly back then)? There's a basic level of social hygiene that actually is useful and healthy... and I'm sure it will cut down on the dating prospects if one fails to meet that minimum standard.

 

[EmergingAlbert]

Yeah, I think the "rule" offered was kind of vague and/or misstated, which is kind of the issue with the whole topic for me... seemingly just a gripe about the social rules under the assumption they are all arbitrary or serve no purpose.

I don't regard my elders as "superiors" in that they are better than me.

However, I think it's wise to listen to people who have more life experience than me without just rejecting them out of hand because they're elders;

I agree with this. I don't have anything against elders, and I do listen to them when what they are saying is valid. I'm not saying that I don't respect elders. I'm just saying that I respect them when they're respectable. I don't respect them just because they're older.

What frustrates me is when some older people (I'm not saying that all elders are like this, but I know a few who are) actually expect me to treat them better than the average Joe simply because of their age. If they prove to me that they actually do have valuable wisdom and life experience, I'll respect them, but I don't just assume that they do because of a number on their head.

and it makes sense just out of self-survival to understand that, because my job gives me a paycheck, I need to actually accept my boss's power over me even if I can disagree with my boss's ideas and make a case for something else.

I don't see how what this has to do with respecting my elders. I always do what my boss says because she is paying me, and she is indeed my boss. She was hired and promoted to her position because of her qualifications, so she deserves to be in that position. And like you said, she is paying me, so if I want to get paid, of course I'm going to do what she said. Again, this seems kind of off topic. Or is it supposed to be?

(A lot of this thread DOES come across as teenage angst...

I'm 22.

or at least someone is getting nagged by authority figures to follow certain rules and is getting sick of it.)

I actually have no problem with authority, at least when it is rightly deserved. If there was no authority in the world, there would be anarchy. I guess the problem is that people who are NOT in positions of authority expect me to treat them like they are. "I'm older than you, so you should do what I say." Age doesn't imply authority. As for all the other social rules discussed in this thread, I don't see police officers arresting us for putting our elbows on the table or the president of my school mandating that I never burp in public. Yet my PEERS (my equals, not authority figures) will sometimes look down on me for not following social rules. Who are they to expect me to follow their rules?

Now that I said that... didn't the dark ages allow people to fart openly? I'm not sure. Some cultures, it's not a big deal; personally, I'd rather not deal with it. What's next? Expectations to shower and groom will be considered dark ages (even though ironically bathing only happened irregularly back then)? There's a basic level of social hygiene that actually is useful and healthy... and I'm sure it will cut down on the dating prospects if one fails to meet that minimum standard.

What I said about the dark ages was situational. I was talking about those rules that WERE made in the dark ages, such as not wearing hats at dinner. However, some more "modern" social rules are also dumb, such as the one about personal hygiene. Yes, you are right...there is a basic level of social hygiene that is useful and healthy. However, the modern socially accepted level of personal hygiene is far from practical. Yes, it's healthy to bathe, but it's not necessary to bathe every single day, which is the socially accepted hygiene level. I only bathe when I'm actually dirty or when I'm trying to impress someone. Otherwise, I don't see the point. Bathing daily just because it's socially acceptable is a waste of soap and water.