Expressions mirrors values, more equal societies almost always do better – mind the income gaps...

The Norwegian blogger Sigrun writes that ”Words (or expressions) mirrors values”, in my amateur translation:

”The researchers and psychologists Hilde Eileen Nafstad and Rory Blakar have counted words that have become used in Norwegian newspapers the last 25 years. They mean that the individualism has exploded since 1984.

The word 'greediness' has increased with 200 percent. But this word is used in criticism of the phenomenon greediness too, so it isn't easy to say what sort of value the use of the word reflects, I think.

Exactly the same can be said about the use of the word 'consumer-society,' which has increased with 100 percent.

That the word 'user' has increased with 60 percent I don't think is strange at all. It has replaced 'recipient of service' in geriatric care, 'client' in social care and 'patient' in psychiatry.

The researchers say that it looks as there is a value change in the opposite direction since 2005. 'Moderation' and 'modesty, diffidence' are mentioned as examples. I would have preferred a renaissance for 'solidarity', which is 60 percent less used today than 1984.

'Moderation' and 'modesty' are individual projects for members of a fat middle class while 'solidarity' has with care of the less fortunate for ones eyes to do.”

Many believe this, but I don't agree. 'Solidarity' is significant for ALL people, in all societies and in the whole world, I think (much) more equal societies (than we have gotten the last 25 years all over the world) are beneficial for ALL people, rich as poor.

See the blogposting “Mind the income gap" about research that resulted in the book "The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better.
Article from TV2 in Norway.

Addition in the evening: Sigrun also writes about "Discourse analysis". That the objectivity conceals the many alternative possibilities for us and are a result of power.

Power is therefore a prerequisiote for to understand the world because it limits a great number of meanings and excludes alternative ways to see the world.

Something a psychiatrists knows she writes.

As a sociological or social critical notion (Foucault) discourse refers to an institutional thought out (??) way of thinking. The discourse idea brings out that it is a context between the forces in the society as they are materailized in institutions, in the language and in the individual's acknowledgement.

Discourse in such a meaning is closesy allied (bound) to different theories about power, where to be able to define discourse often is placed on equal footing with to define the reality itself.

About discourse analysis in Wikipedia.

See “Community and care work in a world of changing ideologies.”