hmm.. on first impression i tend to agree, but i am wondering if this isn't to some extent a male-centric perspective - if you examine gender roles it seems women were encouraged to be vulnerable excessively to a point of being a defining trait of feminity ( this message has being brought to you by... ) while men where discouraged from doing so completely, so is the allowance for vulnerability that we experience actually embracing it in society at large or simply a natural side affect for the fallout of traditional gender roles?
This was an interesting response, and seems plausible. Perhaps this has been covered, but vulnerability or the absence of it would seem to be a defining feature of any culture that has power imbalances. To have a suppressed group internalize their vulnerability as identity would be a more extreme form of it.
Originally Posted by Mole
No, I am talking about personal emotional vulnerability and how it is the basis of personal creativity.
I am not talking about economic risk taking.
That is also quite interesting because you can find both extremes of power in the arts. I think of orchestral conductors who behave like monsters, and then the coffee shop singer who empties their soul into song. I think you have hit on a concept that is complex and layered and could be examined from many angles.
The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas. H.G. WELLS
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. FEYNMAN If this is monkey pee, you're on your own.SCULLY