I need a Theory of Social Relativity!

I have been looking for a nice and well-rounded theory of social relativity for years and couldn’t find anything yet. If anybody knows anything about it please, let me know. I came up with this name on purpose, inspired by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (check up on Wikipedia to refresh your memory). Just to make it clear, I am not talking about Relativism in here (check it out too). Neither about Old or New Institutionalism (if you have not heard of it, don’t worry, Institutionalists are becoming an institution by themselves).

Since Max Weber, I think social scientists pretty much understand already how conventions are naturally established by humans and other animals to gain effectiveness in our actions and use of our brains (we tend to sit in the same seat, follow the same way back home and these kind of things). Take a read on Berger & Luckman’s “The Social Construction of Reality (1966)” for a nice introduction to that subject.

I am talking about a theory that can gather Einstein’s suggestions and combine its consequences with every social aspect of our lives, a theory that can make us to rethink the role of any kind of “constant” social behavior and physical condition.

Let’s think about it: the Earth attracts us to it, just like the Sun attracts the Earth to it. You may not have thought about it but we also attract the Sun and the Earth to ourselves with a tiny force derived from our masses and therefore we also distort space and time by our individual existence just like the Sun or any other mass in rapid movement. I won’t enter into the question about where those gravitational forces come from because then we would get too philosophical (some people believe that gravity is the closest thing we know to God).

In any case, my weird correlation is: just like every mass interact with each other in the universe distorting each other’s physical reality in different degrees, we humans also distort each other’s perceptions on ourselves due to the relativity of all our conventions that are merely based on unreliable and imprecise social definitions and physical evidences that should not be perceived as truth ever (and I think we should have been told that when we were young).

The Persistence of Memory, 1931

The Persistence of Memory, 1931

Words gain meaning with time, individually to each one of us, changing according to the use we give to them and the experience we have with them over time. I can assure that the meaning of the word “love” for you is different from the meaning it has to me. Moreover, the meaning of the word “love” for you today is different from the meaning you will give to it in 5 years. And even the way the word sounds is affected by the wind and the air chemical composition (like humidity).

The values of gold or money are also just conventions that mean nothing more than some kind of physical representation of certain local social power; especially under this “social game” we have been playing called capitalism. The Incas had a completely different relationship with gold, for example. Besides, the weight of an ounce of gold also varies according to the position you are in the planet since we now know that the force of gravity is not constant around our not-so-rounded Earth.

How about the time? Besides the distortion caused by all other masses surrounding us, our planet and solar system, we now know that not every day lasts a day and not every year lasts a year, so our “sacred” seconds, minutes and hours are all mere simplistic representations of a time that is not so fixed as we wished. Consequence: don’t worry if you arrive a minute late to a meeting. Nobody knows the exact time anyway. :-)

Gosh! Everything seems to be so complex! And I am not saying that in the Parsonian sense of the expression :-) but in a social-physical angle that apparently nobody dared to merge yet. I don’t know why, but Dali’s “Persistence of Memory” came to my mind while I was writing this. Perhaps because I am living in Spain and I do think that the Mediterranean people have been facing these complexities with a pleasant sense of disdain that amuses me. Olé!

Advertisements

Can you teach and learn entrepreneurship?

I always felt bizarre within this emerging “industry” of entrepreneurship. After all, I consider myself a practitioner without much success up until now (up until now). Practitioners do not believe much in business academics and academics think they can explain, at least partially, the phenomenon. Actually, in my point of view, anyone can explain, at least partially, a social phenomenon, even if you use the most rigorous method available. I particularly like taxi drivers’ partial explanations of social phenomena, for example. So, I tend to give more credit to practitioners because at least they tried the things they say. I have met a lot of business people during the last 15 years and there is a justified controversy in the possibility of teaching and/or learning anything about entrepreneurship.

Academics, of course, must justify their salaries by swearing that it is possible to teach such a thing, or at least sparking the entrepreneurial spirit in people, whatever that means. I partially agree with them (here it comes this damn “partially” again). This very same dilemma is found on professors or speakers that teach people on how to make money in the stock exchange, for example. After all, if they know how to do that, why don’t they make money on the stock exchange instead of teaching?!?

Well, the answer is not that easy, like most of the things in life but is not encouraging as well. Last year, I went to an academic meeting about entrepreneurship and a very funny discussion came along. What do professors of entrepreneurship should answer if students question their ability to teach something they never did? That is a very pertinent question because 90% of the professors of entrepreneurship in the world never had a business in their lives (I already had 3, yeees! but I they were not innovative businesses and I barely made money with them, noooo!). Well, some may have worked as consultants for companies but I do not consider that a work, that is just a noble self-employed experience (anyone can give advice don’t you think?). Some professors had that answer on the tip of their tongues. According to them, the best golf player in the world may not be the best golf professor in the world. On the contrary, he may end up being a regular professor while another person, who studied and compared the movements of the best golf players ever but was never a good player himself can be a great professor. Good answer! Recently, I heard a much funnier version of this story told by a late Brazilian sports commentator who was also a great writer, Armando Nogueira. In fact, that is why I remembered this story in the US. According to him, “the sports commentator is like an eunuch in the harem: he knows everything about the sport but do not know how to play it”. Ahahahahah, that is a great and very Brazilian definition of this kind of situation!

I have to agree with these guys, their arguments are good, but still not enough I think, because it is frightening knowing that as an entrepreneur you can lose everything, injure people, degrade nature, etc, due to bad decisions you make. And this kind of things are very difficult to explain (although not impossible).

Other languages: Continue reading