Family: Enigmatic and Tacit
What does hearing the word family bring to your thoughts? Whatever comes to your thoughts I don’t think you will ever be baffled with the question of what is a family. It is so common that it would look foolhardy to try to discuss what a family is. Herein lies an interesting issue where everyone has a very clear understanding of family in their own way but there is no commonly accepted and understood “hard” meaning of it. By this I mean ones that provide clarity on what is a family like its boundary definition, membership and exit criteria, roles and duties of its members and also its role in the broader society etc vary a lot not only spatially and temporally but also between one other. For such social artefacts, the need for a board common understanding is more important than a proper “water tight” definition which is “right”. In attempting to do so we may conflate the need to define with the enunciation of normative principles. When one tries to think of a family in abstraction what would come to mind in general is that of a couple (typically of opposite sexes) at the nucleus with other members like children, other blood relationships but when one ponders over it more deeply there would be enough exceptions and conditions that would make this not of much importance if not irrelevant. It baffles me how such an important social institution exists without such a clear common understanding. The doctrine of “I know it, when I see it” is the one that seems to be most apt for this. However, this by itself is not an impediment in the quest for understanding it.
Family has been central to all the civilizations in the world. It might even be wrong to use the word “civilization” in this context due to the value judgement associated with it in its comparison with “tribal” or “barbaric”. However even these so called lower levels of society have had a notion of family. I am perplexed to see how totally unconnected groups across the world have evolved social structures on the lines of family. It would be pointed out that even institutions like king, chief etc has also evolved almost in similar lines, but those are higher level structures. Basic social structures are highly personal and interpersonal at the same time and that is the most interesting aspect of it. Its difficult for a person to differentiate between personal and non-personal with respect to members of a family. A discerning reader would find this argument superfluous as how can I claim that there are similar social structures called family across the world when I have stated earlier that there is no commonly understood concept. I would say that even the presence of the concept of family regardless of what it means by itself is a great thing that underlines something that is common.
Get Senthil Kumar Natarajan’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Family has been considered as the most important building block of the society in various historical references. Ancient philosophies talk about the concept of Grihasthan(India), Oikos(Greek) etc. and its importance. These not only consider them as something of a personal choice but highlight its importance in the higher level social institutions like a state and also in terms of economic prosperity. Some authors like Aristotle even say that a state is structurally similar to household. Apart from the public role of a family, equal or more importance is given to the internal aspects of a family. These are the rules that determine the roles of its members, power relationships within its members and other related matters. There are rules that relate to creation of a family as family is not a static one and one family arises from another or can merge with another which makes it even more interesting and complex. While there is public Vs personal dichotomy with respect to family, what makes it more interesting is juxtaposing these and the impact of one extending into the realms of the other. This may have the impact of fudging the divide and lead various accusations in this regard. But these are not necessarily one that needs to be avoided in total. Many social movements like women rights treat upon this area of overlap. It would be no one’s contention that such movements are not justified despite having some differences over few aspects of it actions.
Till now we have been trying to see what is a family. However, there are areas where family relationship is discouraged or explicitly sought to be banned. Laws related to corruption and nepotism clearly look to disengage the person from family in their duties. The contentious issues related to property succession is another big issue, both within the family and outside. Within the family it deals with the share of its members and outside it on the impact it can have on outcomes like social equality. This is one area where it is also related at the personal level when its proposed that economic prosperity be linked according to one’s own capability and work rather than that of intergenerational or intra family transfers. However, these are contested on the lines that the drive to earn and succeed will not be there if the ability to provide for one’s family is sought to be curtailed. Some policies like promoting insurance and social support by the state are also said to diminish the role of family in one’s life by shifting the some of these functions into public sphere.
Having treaded into personal vs family domain in the previous paragraph it this would be the right point to segway into some economic concepts related to this. Rational man, though proposed only as a model, has captured the imagination of a lot of the educated class. At the outset it seems to be not very friendly to the notion of family, though it can be argued that the need for its existence can be explained starting from its basic postulates by showing how family helps reduce cost of transaction, helps increase the productivity of its members etc. Though it may seem correct from a logical derivation perspective it runs the risk of being called “calculative”. I am highlighting this accusation despite GS Becker claiming that this logical derivation need not be the actual thought process in the minds of a real person as nuances of definition of economics field is not factored in into most public perceptions. Even in development economics there is a conflict between individual welfare and that of household. Research on providing the benefits to the wife vs husband, directly providing benefits to a child etc have been debated and in many cases different solutions implemented as a policy also by the state.
I have rambled through various important and serious issues where each one can/are by itself a whole field of study. The intension was just to bring together various aspects on the common thread of family and to see it from that context. But what I find as the most magical aspect of family is the impact it has on individuals who are part of it. While conceptually it can go both ways I would stick my head out and speculate that it has had more of a positive impact. Family may be the lurking variable in many studies. In this regards I am enamoured by one point that Thomas Sowell highlights with respect to African American backwardness issue. He shows that African American’s with a stable family are comparable in economic prosperity to that of White Americans. I for me shows what a magic family can play on the individuals. While there may be a huge debate amongst economists on such variables I am only looking at it from the perspective of family where race and other aspects dull in relation to it. A well working family seems to be a great place to be in regardless of all the controversies and issues surrounding different conceptual aspects around it.
