| Line 27: |
Line 27: |
| | :::I don't even know what that is; I know next to nothing about economics (although I plan to fulfill part of my social sciences requirement with a class in it). I wasn't saying that the idea is definitely not original, just that a lack of search results for your term doesn't prove that it is. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 23:03, 6 August 2008 (EDT) | | :::I don't even know what that is; I know next to nothing about economics (although I plan to fulfill part of my social sciences requirement with a class in it). I wasn't saying that the idea is definitely not original, just that a lack of search results for your term doesn't prove that it is. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 23:03, 6 August 2008 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | :::: It's interesting you don't know what the "invisible hand" is, and I appreciate your candor. I bet the familiarity with that term and concept is far higher among conservatives than liberals. Indeed, it has been said that a good economics course is more likely to convert liberals to conservatives than any other teaching. That said, it's almost impossible to present or discuss a concept for an invisible hand of marriage without using the term "invisible hand." The lack of Google cites to it was meant to be illustrative rather than a proof of originality.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:30, 6 August 2008 (EDT) | + | :::: It's interesting you don't know what the "invisible hand" is, and I appreciate your candor. I bet the familiarity with that term and concept is far higher among conservatives than liberals. Indeed, it has been said that a good economics course is more likely to convert liberals to conservatives than any other teaching. That said, it's almost impossible to present or discuss a concept for an [[invisible hand of marriage]] without using the term "invisible hand." The lack of Google cites to it was meant to be illustrative rather than a proof of originality.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:30, 6 August 2008 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| | :::::To some extent it's an inverse of the [http://www.google.com/search?q=economic+cost+of+divorce&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS263US263 well-documented] social and economic cost of divorce, and, of course, a good example of the ripple effects of good teamwork. | | :::::To some extent it's an inverse of the [http://www.google.com/search?q=economic+cost+of+divorce&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS263US263 well-documented] social and economic cost of divorce, and, of course, a good example of the ripple effects of good teamwork. |
| Line 35: |
Line 35: |
| | :::::Where marriage is concerned, the "Invisible Hand" metaphor is better suited to the positive influence of marriages, committed partnerships & families on the fabric of society. If you dropped a thousand individuals on an island, and couples & families totaling 1000 people on a similar island, it's probably a safe bet that a few years later conditions on the island seeded with couples & families would be better. Since couples and families have a greater self-interest in mutual support and social order than individuals, the nature of those relationships serves as an "invisible hand" that guides the social ecosystem towards order instead of anarchy. The island of individuals may do well too, and even thrive, but without the inherent social connections of partnership and family at the start, it's bound to be more challenging. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 19:30, 7 August 2008 (EDT) | | :::::Where marriage is concerned, the "Invisible Hand" metaphor is better suited to the positive influence of marriages, committed partnerships & families on the fabric of society. If you dropped a thousand individuals on an island, and couples & families totaling 1000 people on a similar island, it's probably a safe bet that a few years later conditions on the island seeded with couples & families would be better. Since couples and families have a greater self-interest in mutual support and social order than individuals, the nature of those relationships serves as an "invisible hand" that guides the social ecosystem towards order instead of anarchy. The island of individuals may do well too, and even thrive, but without the inherent social connections of partnership and family at the start, it's bound to be more challenging. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 19:30, 7 August 2008 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | == Google search on "invisible hand of marriage" == | + | :::::: Thanks for the interesting insights. However, I don't think you'll fully captured the concept of the [[invisible hand]] and how it motivates individuals to work more efficiently, just as the [[invisible hand of marriage]] does (in an even more powerful way). |
| | + | |
| | + | :::::: I do see that our own entry on the [[invisible hand]] needs work ... which I'll take care of right now. As written, it's a socialistic distortion of the free enterprise concept.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:04, 7 August 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | == Google search on "[[invisible hand of marriage]]" == |
| | | | |
| | I tried this, and it actually looks as if it is true that it is an original Conservapedia term. I do get one hit now, and oddly it's not for Conservapedia, but for a website that seems to be blocked by the Conservapedia spam filter. | | I tried this, and it actually looks as if it is true that it is an original Conservapedia term. I do get one hit now, and oddly it's not for Conservapedia, but for a website that seems to be blocked by the Conservapedia spam filter. |