View Single Post
Old 11-17-2008, 04:40 PM   #12
Lance Monance
Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Ok, but why should we assume that opinions will be more differing?
I thought along the lines of something like that:
For simplicity, let's assume that someone can have 2 different opinions on any given topic.
The probability that 2 people have the same opinion is (1/2^2)*2, the probability that 3 people have the same opinion is (1/2^3)*2. (I hope I didn't make a complete fool of myself and overlooked something here.. )
That would mean that the chances of agreeing on any given topic are worse with more people involved. Opinions wouldn't be more differing, but the chances of having an agreement would be worse. And if conflict stems from disagreements...
But perhaps I oversimplified it...with more people, one of them might even try and mediate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Why should we assume that polygamous families would be less willing to settle those differences?
We shouldn't. Point taken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
If the polygamous family is democratic, then having more voices would seem to imply more solutions being offered to potential problems (nevermind more "hands on deck" to head off some situations before they even become problems).
That's a possibility, but what I mentioned above is one as well, I believe. (that more voices would increase the chances of conflict)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
On the other hand, if the polygamous family is more authoritarian (where "the man" makes the decisions), then "the man" makes the decisions and every one (allegedly) falls in behind regardless of how they feel about it. In the first scenario, the situation is the same or better as a monogamous family. In the second scenario, the situation would appear to be the same as an equally authoritarian monogamous family.
Well if someone calls the shots and everyone else just falls behind, there would be no conflict at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
For the sake of argument, suppose I concede this point. What's the "conflict difference" between a family with a husband, a wife, and four kids vs a husband, two wives, and three kids. Your argument that more people means more potential for conflict. If we have two situations with 6 individuals each, please tell me why we should assume that one is going to be better than the other. If you're attempted to respond re: the number of kids, then please assume that all children are between the ages of 12 and 17 and have activities such as sports, music lessons, friends, sleep-overs, High School Musical 973, etc.
There is no difference. Ok, the conflict argument doesn't really get us anywhere, but then again, even if polygamous families were shown to be more prone to conflict than equally sized normal families, it wouldn't be a convincing argument.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Are you a gambling man?

Sociologists have to get their doctorates somehow.
Was kind of hoping that one of those words would be a link.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Glad you decided to participate. Your English is very good.
thx
Lance Monance is offline   you may: quote & reply,