I was just reading this earlier:
Here's what George Herbert Mead said in 1934: "The individual experiences himself as such, not directly, but only indirectly, from the particular standpoints of other individual members of the same group, or from the generalized standpoint of the social group as a whole to which he belongs."
Sociologist Gary Fine put it more succinctly: "The other is the mirror by which individuals learn of their selves." What Fine meant by "the other" was what Mead called the "generalized other." The added together or averaged other.
So the status system, too, collects data and does statistics on them. What matters is not what your parents tell you (they might think you're gorgeous but so what?), or what your brother tells you (he's just teasing), or what your best friend tells you. What matters is how you're seen by the "generalized other." It matters because it's more accurate and hence has more predictive value than the opinion of any single individual.
Kids today don't even know who George Carlin is. I'm afraid you'll have to tart up your TAs in dance outfits and go all Britney on them. "Oops, we all did it again/This imperative/Is categorical."
Peter Singer did it again/
consequentialists/
cannot be friends.
My original position is a veil of ignorance about 18th century moral philosophy.