Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 12:39:03 -0500 (EST)
From: brian callahan <makhno2-AT-earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Scooby Snacks


Andy adds some much needed depth to our discussions:
>>>>>>>
I've been pondering this - surely the argument falls
down over the whole issue of supply-side power
relations in the distribution of 'Scooby Snacks'.

Are these not also a form of extrinsic motivation of
the type noted by Bowles and Gintis in their seminal
work 'Schooling in Capitalist America', whereby the
intrinsic motivation of meaningful work is replaced
for the alienated worker by a system of extrinsic
rewards and goodies akin to the stars McWorkers get
for excellence in burger flipping?
>>>>>>>>

Well, this does point to the question of how one deals with
individuals with diminished capacity in an anarchist society.  Now, Scooby
can speak, with a bit of an impediment, but he clearly is dependent on the
others.  Shaggy is clearly stoned all the time with a permanent caase of the
munchies.  The way Fred, Daphne and Velma deal with these two is by a series
of rewards, the scooby snacks, when they behave appropriately.  Certainly,
Shaggy is free to end this relationship whenever he wants by just tossing
his bong away, but he accepts it.  Scooby is simply unable to deal with life
on his own, due to his speech and reasoning impediment (maybe he's been
drinking Shaggy's bong water), so it may not be possible for him to either
acheive autonomy or ever really appreciate the intrinsic value of his work.

Now, onto the question of Scrappy Doo, huckster or help...