Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I can agree with the first statement.

I do not agree with the second. This term "social status" is an ill-advised euphemism for any sort of intangible trait(s) of human behavior whose value(s) is indeterminate, not persistent, not heritable.

Considering the source though, "social status" might allude to peerage, which is purportedly an inheritable trait as is caste, race, tribe, nationality: Such title signifies what beside the research preference, prejudice, or methodological bias?

Such titles might denote strict, hierarchical assignment of a membership in a group by a group. Title is not an intrinsic value. It signifies a political function. Title traits vary considerably across groups and are mutable. The strictest limitation on entitlement is group enforcement. Offend the group, lose, the trait. Leave the group, lose the trait. No progeny (UK-Eng. "issue"), lose the trait.

"Social status" might as easily allude to celebrity or notoriety or reputation or any function ("role") in an enterprise or "social capital" or class or conspicuous display of "status symbols", adornment of the body with objects --bought, found, manufactured, borrowed-- that connote beauty, for example.

Standardized attributes and measurement of beauty: How's that coming along for Oxbridge docents?

Unspecified "social status" conveys little to no systematic value to factor analysis of reproductive selection and outcomes.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Mon May 6th, 2019 at 02:11:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series