Which of these two individuals are more individualistic?

[Liberté]

Person A is an entrepreneur. He comes from a solidly middle-class background and holds the values which were instilled within him from an early age; his political and metaphysical views do not differ in the slightest from those of his father or of his grandfather. But unlike them, Person A decided to break out on his own and become financially independent - to establish himself in the world by means of his own ingenuity. To that end, he has succeeded. Whatever it is he sells, be it antiques or household products or confectionery goods, Person A produces goods which are consumed by others like him.

Person B is a member of the 'creative class'. Living in what he considers to be genteel poverty, Person B, like Person A, makes his income by the sweat of his own brow. In his case, however, the source of that income comes from works he produces by hand: be it oil paintings or sculptures or books published on the vanity press, Person B produces goods which are consumed by others who are like him.

(And yeah, before you ask, this poll was inspired by There Is A Policeman Inside All Our Heads.)

[Liberté]

Also, if you can, explain to me why one is more individualistic than the other, comparatively speaking.

[WillK]

Person A is an entrepreneur. He comes from a solidly middle-class background and holds the values which were instilled within him from an early age; his political and metaphysical views do not differ in the slightest from those of his father or of his grandfather. But unlike them, Person A decided to break out on his own and become financially independent - to establish himself in the world by means of his own ingenuity. To that end, he has succeeded. Whatever it is he sells, be it antiques or household products or confectionery goods, Person B produces goods which are consumed by others like him.

Is the implication that the father and grandfather were not financially independent? 
In the last sentence, is it supposed to be Person A?  And how does one "produce" antiques? 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How is this different from Person A?  You have stated that both produce goods consumed by others like themself. 

[Liberté]

Is the implication that the father and grandfather were not financially independent?

Right. Person A is basically the old rags-to-riches story.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes. Thanks for catching that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps "procure them for resale" would be a better word. The gist is that this guy is an entrepreneur. Nothing in the essentials of his operations are important - what matters is his 'lifestyle'.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's rather the point. ;-)

[TheGlobalizer]

Neither are particularly "individualistic" from the facts presented.

I would consider the entrepeneur to be closer to that idea because he is dynamic and successful, whereas the artist is just creative.  If the artist too is successful, I'd call it a push.  For me, success is a component in the analysis, though the measurement of that success (financial, acclaim, etc.) is a subjective definition.

Individualism is, IMO, more about ideological independence, and neither example particularly provides fertile soil for that characteristic.  The entrepeneur is limited by the ideas of his family and the artist is limited by the ideas of his social group, and both are limited by their apparent professional associations.  They're better than groupthink dullards, but we're not talking about Howard Hughes or Andy Warhol, either.

[Liberté]

You bring up a good point: why is success considered a core component of individuality? Some of the most 'successful' regimes in history have not been all that individualistic; some in fact have tried to stamp out individuality. What's more, some of the most successful individuals are not at all ideologically independent - the odds being that if they were too independent they'd want nothing to do with 'the system'. So how did 'success' get wedded to the concept of individuality?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Individualism isn't about the job you do. It's a philosophical conviction.

[Liberté]

Individualism isn't about the job you do. It's a philosophical conviction.

In modern society, the two often are conflated into one religion: an individualist philosophy being the "faith", an individualist job being the "works".

[Antonio the Sixth]

Individualism isn't about the job you do. It's a philosophical conviction.

In modern society, the two often are conflated into one religion: an individualist philosophy being the "faith", an individualist job being the "works".

I think you can do a very "communitarian" job (working in a team, in a factory or in any other collective structure) and still hold pretty individualistic views. IMO, one's way of life isn't that much correlated with its conviction.

[Liberté]

Individualism isn't about the job you do. It's a philosophical conviction.

In modern society, the two often are conflated into one religion: an individualist philosophy being the "faith", an individualist job being the "works".

I think you can do a very "communitarian" job (working in a team, in a factory or in any other collective structure) and still hold pretty individualistic views. IMO, one's way of life isn't that much correlated with its conviction.

I'm sure you can. In fact, my belief in this possibility influences most of what I do here. That said, my main purpose in asking this question is to examine how deeply rooted a certain ethos still is in the world. About the only way I can explain it is to ask you to watch this.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Individualism isn't about the job you do. It's a philosophical conviction.

In modern society, the two often are conflated into one religion: an individualist philosophy being the "faith", an individualist job being the "works".

I think you can do a very "communitarian" job (working in a team, in a factory or in any other collective structure) and still hold pretty individualistic views. IMO, one's way of life isn't that much correlated with its conviction.

     Indeed, I would say that you could hold to an individualistic world view & then choose tradition & community for reasons unrelated to a belief in any objective formulation of their merits. I've often thought about joining a church for the social experience, even though I am thoroughly atheist.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

Person B since he is freelance whereas Person A is a man inclined to hierarchy- that he is at the top of the hierarchy does not negate that and make him individualist. The CEO/President who "leads" the hierarchy is just as collectivistic as the worker bees on the lower rungs.

Also the implication is that Person B had departed from the views of his parents, since you don't mention that one way or the other whereas you did mention that Person A departed from his parent's views. So in this regard Person B is clearly more individualistic. Also Person B is less obsessed with the pursuit of wealth then Person A- though then again this could just be a manifestation of conformance to values of his subculture, so disregard it.

Of course individualism is not an inherently good thing. Their most individualist person in the world would be a Pedophile who makes his living as a Hit Man.

[TheGlobalizer]

You bring up a good point: why is success considered a core component of individuality? Some of the most 'successful' regimes in history have not been all that individualistic; some in fact have tried to stamp out individuality. What's more, some of the most successful individuals are not at all ideologically independent - the odds being that if they were too independent they'd want nothing to do with 'the system'. So how did 'success' get wedded to the concept of individuality?

Well, since I think individuality is related to espousing an ideology, the quality of individuality is related to the degree to which the person succeeds in actualizing the ideology.

For an individualistic businessman, success is manifest in finances; for an artist, in recognition; for a politician, in persuading people.  Of course, you can also be successful by simply "living the ideal", but that's a bit harder to measure, as there's a lot of unsuccessful people acting in the guise of individuality but are really just members of a subculture of showy different-ness.  The hippie/new-age bandwagon, the punk bandwagon, the emo bandwagon, they aren't indicative of individuality as much as alternative groupthink.