Differences between Acquisitve and Conflictual (Prohibitions) -- Mimetic Theory and Literary Study

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:06:22 03/02/08 Sun
Author: JPJ II
Subject: Differences between Acquisitve and Conflictual (Prohibitions)

Dr Jackson mentioned using the message board to study, so I thought I'd post some of my conclusions and hope all of you could critique them before tomorrow.

One of the main differences between Acquisitive (interdividual) and Conflictual Mimesis lies in the type of prohibitions found in each. In cases of interdividual mimesis, the prohibitions against sameness and doubling comes in the form of the Model's opposition to the subject's attaining of the object (using our basic triangle paradigm). This is personal, and is directed only at the subject. In the case of Conflictual mimesis, the community creates (as part of the scapegoat mechanism) LEGAL prohibitions that are enforced nearly universally across the entire community.

Legal prohibitions affecting the entire community cannot, in and of themselves, create resentment as the give no grounds to any inequality within the community. Personal Prohibitions create hostility at the personal level between the model and the subject because they are seen (by the subject) as a slight against the subject by the model. Because no one is conscious of the mimetic mechanism at this point, the subject does not perceive the mimetic forces at work behind the model's opposition to him, namely the fear of sameness or undifferentiation. The subject then believes the model to have a lesser view of him, believing the model to hold him in some contempt. This in turn creates a hostility towards the model by the subject, creating a reciprocity of hostility between the subject and the model.

So, the advantage of Legal prohibitions is that they work toward preventing mimetic rivalries not only in their ability to prevent certain forms of mimetic behavior which would lead to sameness and a breakdown of differences, but that they also prevent the type of hostility created by 'Personal Prohibitions' because the legal prohibitions apply equally to all and thus cannot be construed as a slight against anyone.

How does that sound?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]