Bio: Maurice Bloch is an academic researcher from London School of Economics and Political Science. The author has contributed to research in topic(s): Kinship & Ideology. The author has an hindex of 40, co-authored 103 publication(s) receiving 7458 citation(s).
Topics: Kinship, Ideology, Morality, Marxist philosophy, Applied anthropology
Papers published on a yearly basis
01 Jan 1982
TL;DR: Bloch and Parry as mentioned in this paper described the social dimensions of death in four African hunting and gathering societies, including Lugbara death, greed, cannibalism, and death pollution in Cantoese society.
Abstract: Preface 1. Introduction: death and the regeneration of life Maurice Bloch and Jonathan Parry 2. The dead and the devils among the Bolivian Laymi Olivia Haris 3. Sacrificial death and the necrophagous ascetic Jonathan Parry 4. Witchcraft, greed, cannibalism and death: some related themes from the New Guinea Highlands Andrew Strathern 5. Lugbara death John Middleton 6. Of flesh and bones: the management of death pollution in Cantoese society James L. Watson 7. Social dimensions of death in four African hunting and gathering societies James Woodburn 8. Death, women and power Maurice Bloch Index.
01 Jan 1989-Research Papers in Economics
TL;DR: This article examined the way money is symbolically represented in a range of different cultures, from South and South-east Asia, Africa and South America, and the moral evaluation of monetary and commercial exchanges as against exchanges of other kinds, concluding that even in a non-monetary economy these features are likely to exist within a certain sphere of activity, and that it is therefore misleading to attribute them to money.
Abstract: This volume deals with the way in which money is symbolically represented in a range of different cultures, from South and South-east Asia, Africa and South America. It is also concerned with the moral evaluation of monetary and commercial exchanges as against exchanges of other kinds. The essays cast radical doubt on many Western assumptions about money: that it is the acid which corrodes community, depersonalises human relationships, and reduces differences of quality to those of mere quantity; that it is the instrument of man's freedom, and so on. Rather than supporting the proposition that money produces easily specifiable changes in world view, the emphasis here is on the way in which existing world views and economic systems give rise to particular ways of representing money. But this highly relativistic conclusion is qualified once we shift the focus from money to the system of exchange as a whole. One rather general pattern that then begins to emerge is of two separate but related transactional orders, the majority of systems making some ideological space for relatively impersonal, competitive and individual acquisitive activity. This implies that even in a non-monetary economy these features are likely to exist within a certain sphere of activity, and that it is therefore misleading to attribute them to money. By so doing, a contrast within cultures is turned into a contrast between cultures, thereby reinforcing the notion that money itself has the power to transform the nature of social relationships.
01 Nov 1989
TL;DR: In this article, the symbolic representation of money in a range of different societies, and more specifically with the moral evaluation of monetary and commercial exchanges, is discussed, emphasizing the enormous cultural variation in the way money is symbolized and how this symbolism relates to culturally constructed notions of production, consumption, circulation and exchange.
Abstract: This collection is concerned with the symbolic representation of money in a range of different societies, and more specifically with the moral evaluation of monetary and commercial exchanges. It focuses on the different cultural meanings surrounding monetary transactions, emphasizing the enormous cultural variation in the way money is symbolized and how this symbolism relates to culturally constructed notions of production, consumption, circulation, and exchange.
01 Aug 1977
TL;DR: Parry and Bloch as discussed by the authors discuss the moral perils of exchange between money and men and women in the context of the Indian jajmani system and the role of women in money.
Abstract: 1. Introduction: money and the morality of exchange Jonathan Parry and Maurice Bloch 2. Misconceiving the grain heap: a critique of the concept of the Indian jajmani system C. J. Fuller 3. On the moral perils of exchange Jonathan Parry 4. Money, men and women R. L. Stirrat 5. Cooking money: gender and the symbolic transformation of means of exchange in a Malay fishing community Janet Carsten 6. Drinking cash: the purification of money through ceremonial exchange in Fiji C. Toren 7. The symbolism of money in Imerina Maurice Block 8. Resistance to the present by the past: mediums and money in Zimbabwe D. Lan 9. Precious metals in the Andean economy M. J. Sallnow 10. The earth and the state: the sources and meanings of money in Northern Potosi, Bolivia Olivia Harris.
01 Sep 1995-History of European Ideas
TL;DR: In this paper, Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism are discussed. And the history of European ideas: Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 721-722.
Abstract: (1995). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. History of European Ideas: Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 721-722.
01 Feb 1991-Organization Science
TL;DR: Work, learning, and innovation in the context of actual communities and actual practices are discussed in this paper, where it is argued that the conventional descriptions of jobs mask not only the ways people work, but also significant learning and innovation generated in the informal communities-of-practice in which they work.
Abstract: Recent ethnographic studies of workplace practices indicate that the ways people actually work usually differ fundamentally from the ways organizations describe that work in manuals, training programs, organizational charts, and job descriptions. Nevertheless, organizations tend to rely on the latter in their attempts to understand and improve work practice. We examine one such study. We then relate its conclusions to compatible investigations of learning and of innovation to argue that conventional descriptions of jobs mask not only the ways people work, but also significant learning and innovation generated in the informal communities-of-practice in which they work. By reassessing work, learning, and innovation in the context of actual communities and actual practices, we suggest that the connections between these three become apparent. With a unified view of working, learning, and innovating, it should be possible to reconceive of and redesign organizations to improve all three.
•08 Sep 2020
TL;DR: A review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species – frequent outliers.
Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.
•01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a theory of intergroup relations from visiousness to viciousness, and the psychology of group dominance, as well as the dynamics of the criminal justice system.
Abstract: Part I. From There to Here - Theoretical Background: 1. From visiousness to viciousness: theories of intergroup relations 2. Social dominance theory as a new synthesis Part II. Oppression and its Psycho-Ideological Elements: 3. The psychology of group dominance: social dominance orientation 4. Let's both agree that you're really stupid: the power of consensual ideology Part III. The Circle of Oppression - The Myriad Expressions of Institutional Discrimination: 5. You stay in your part of town and I'll stay in mine: discrimination in the housing and retail markets 6. They're just too lazy to work: discrimination in the labor market 7. They're just mentally and physically unfit: discrimination in education and health care 8. The more of 'them' in prison, the better: institutional terror, social control and the dynamics of the criminal justice system Part IV. Oppression as a Cooperative Game: 9. Social hierarchy and asymmetrical group behavior: social hierarchy and group difference in behavior 10. Sex and power: the intersecting political psychologies of patriarchy and empty-set hierarchy 11. Epilogue.
01 Jul 1997-Strategic Management Journal
TL;DR: The central argument of as discussed by the authors is that firm behavior is the result of how firms channel and distribute the attention of their decision-makers, and that decision makers do what they focus their attention on depending on what issues and answers they focus on and how the firm's rules, resources, and relationships distribute various issues, answers, and decision makers into specific communications and procedures.
Abstract: The central argument is that firm behavior is the result of how firms channel and distribute the attention of their decision-makers. What decision-makers do depends on what issues and answers they focus their attention on. What issues and answers they focus on depends on the specific situation and on how the firm's rules, resources, and relationships distribute various issues, answers, and decision-makers into specific communications and procedures. The paper develops these theoretical principles into a model of firm behavior and presents its implications for explaining firm behavior and adaptation. ? 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.