Tribe mentality

[Singu]

It's kind of funny how humans have the innate tendency to group themselves into their "tribes", and create an "us vs them" attitude. The people in our "in" groups are always good, kind, generous, trustworthy, right, etc, and the people in the "out" groups are always evil, suspicious, violent, dishonest, etc. We are often nice and generous to our "in" groups, but tend to have little to no feelings or empathy for the out group. This is our innate desire mapped into our brains.

In MBTI, it's the intuitives vs the sensors, the feelers vs the thinkers, extroverts vs the introverts, while in Socionics, it's the Quadras or functions. Things are usually more peaceful in Enneagrams, because Enneagrams is more about self-development and more "spiritual".

If it's not typologies, then people separate themselves into "identities", such as gender, sexual preference, politics, religion, beliefs, etc.

[Tonatiuh]

It's hardwired by nature.

[Mori]

I think it's something humans cannot escape from. One day existing tribes might diminish and replaced by new ones. But the concept of tribe, persists.

[Pookie]

Willpower is finite. Either you cut off effort at a certain level to preserve the consistency for the whole group, or your sporadic in character to everyone in your life.

[summerprincess]

This bothers me too. People don't think that other people, even ****** and Stalin, are never "monsters". They are just people. There is no fundamental difference in the biological or psychological makeup of Jeffrey Dahmer vs. Mother Teresa; yes people can have mental illnesses, lack empathy, etc but we are all HUMAN. Unfortunately people compartmentalize hugely and think that their in group makes them different - it doesn't. If a Trump-voting conservative Baptist from Oklahoma was born at exactly the same time, but in Egypt to a Muslim family - they would be a conservative Salafist Muslim.

[Chae]

Easy: Ego separates.

The ego vanishes through unity but it's been traded for a long time so we can hardly get rid of it, and don't even know how Check out this entity here, and I say entity deliberately because they teach how to be a spiritual nobody beyond all category, dichotomy, merging completely.

[Singu]

Well, I would think that negative assessment of people like ****** and Jeffrey Dahmer are warranted. It's just that the prejudices against the "others" are unwarranted because they are innocent. But then again... it's a bit dangerous to go overboard with the hatred so that we lose our cool and be unable to calmly analyze and assess a person or a group of people.

[Singu]

Easy: Ego separates.

The ego vanishes through unity but it's been traded for a long time so we can hardly get rid of it, and don't even know how

Yeah I find this interesting, I used to be into Buddhism but I kind of forgot about it.

Somewhat related, this is an interesting video that I saw a while ago:

"Greatest enemy: Ego"


"People's need to protect their own egos knows no bounds. They will lie, cheat, steal, kill, do whatever it takes to maintain what we call ego boundaries".

"There is no such thing as an external enemy. All perception of an enemy is a projection of the ego as the enemy."

"You could say that 100% of our external enemies are of our own creation."

"Your greatest enemy is your own inner perception, your own ignorance, your own ego"

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

yeah I often found it hilarious that some redneck str8 abusive person with four ex-wives, an alcoholic problem, definite cruel streak thought himself morally better than me and thus found me so easy to dehumanize and discard - but the moral ****** professor who uses the word 'reiterate' too much and looked down on blue collar str8 man jobs wasn't really in the right either. Because there is no right or wrong in the end, just Jesus' forgiving and all-encompassing love.

I am a nerdy trekkie by heart, and your post reminded me of the TNG episode 'Remember Me' where Beverly Crusher got trapped in this weird dimension where ppl kept disappearing. It had a really heartwarming message about oneness and how beyond all the veils and superficial categories, we are just one human spirit. I believe that to be true despite all the conflict and hatred and darkness that inevitably goes on in the world... you deny that something is in you... you deny reality. This of course, includes our own willingness and eagerness to do harm or blame others for our problems. I have accepted that my shadow side is an abusive straight monster rapist sex offender that wants to spit on women for sexual pleasure... and inside the abusive sexual str8 sadist is a ****** waiting to come out and be fisted in the woods while wearing a ballcap. We are all One. =) Differences are a just a test/trial to realize this most ultimate truth.

Also you might like alex marchand's stuff....

http://www.alexandermarchand.com/

[Grendel]

And for every two Socionists bound by the cognitive biases of tribe mentality, there will be one with enough critical thinking prowess to divorce his use of a taxonomy from these cognitive biases. If someone applies a bigoted cognitive bias to a taxonomy system that displays what objective traits different taxa of people actually have, it's that person's fault for applying these biases, not the system's fault for attempting to categorize and explain reality.


Realism about the objective traits of different people -- and types of people -- does not imply judging said types of people for their respective vices. It's up to the test of time to punish our sins, not us.

[Raver]

Liberals vs. Conservatives is simultaneously one of the most obvious us vs. them dynamic, yet the one that a lot of people tend to become trapped to IMO.

[Singu]

Liberals vs. Conservatives is simultaneously one of the most obvious us vs. them dynamic, yet the one that a lot of people tend to become trapped to IMO.

Yeah, I can't think of any other groupings where they each are absolutely convinced that the other side is completely evil. Not that I'm not guilty of doing it myself.

But I wouldn't go as far as to say that there's no real such thing as right or wrong and succumb into moral relativism where you can't arbitrate anything because there are no real values or standards whatsoever.

[Tonatiuh]

"There is no such thing as an external enemy. All perception of an enemy is a projection of the ego as the enemy."

2A1AF67600000578-3144213-Street_performers_entertaining_young_children_and_passersby_have-a-4_14.jpg

I beg to differ.

[Singu]

2A1AF67600000578-3144213-Street_performers_entertaining_young_children_and_passersby_have-a-4_14.jpg

I beg to differ.

Well in the video, it says that the ego creates imaginary external enemies, which in turn would attack us, which is also the creation of the ego because then it forces us to defend our own egos. So basically, the ego is like a clever parasite that has been controlling us all along.

[Tonatiuh]

Well in the video, it says that the ego creates imaginary external enemies, which in turn would attack us, which is also the creation of the ego because then it forces us to defend our own egos. So basically, the ego is like a clever parasite that has been controlling us all along.

That thought is something like a fragile glass figurine. It belongs inside it's protective casing inside of a museum. I'm much more in favor of Schopenhauer's description of innate human agency and will.

[ClownsandEntropy]

So I guess you've got the general in-group/out-group biases that happen with everyone, and those I think are unavoidable. Stuff like preferring to hang with people you think are similar to you, wanting to belong to a "tribe", being biased to think your group is smarter/faster/better/stronger than other groups, etc. are natural biases that are a consequence of our evolutionary past and it is indeed healthy for people to want to belong to a group and feel close to them, and probably a useful way to give us an identity and make us develop.

But the other thing which we need is compassion for outside groups, and concern for what happens to them and what they want in their lives.

I mean, the first thing will tend to suppress the second thing, but if you have the second thing then you will still be OK. And the first thing has many benefits and is part of our psychology so I don't think we should try to remove it. Even better, maybe the second thing is part of the "tribe's identity", so by being a member you are agreeing that other groups are important too.

[Singu]

But the other thing which we need is compassion for outside groups, and concern for what happens to them and what they want in their lives.

In Buddhism... this is done by expanding the "inner" group. Like it starts from yourself, then your immediate family, then your friends, your loved ones, your own region, your own country, then eventually expand this to even animals and plants, etc...

[Grendel]

Well in the video, it says that the ego creates imaginary external enemies, which in turn would attack us, which is also the creation of the ego because then it forces us to defend our own egos. So basically, the ego is like a clever parasite that has been controlling us all along.

"M-m-maybe if I make a peace offering to the hungry smilodon on my tail h-he'll realize the meal that he wants to make of my flesh is all in his head."

Bullshit.

Struggle for survival > everything else >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> social psychology.

[Singu]

"M-m-maybe if I make a peace offering to the hungry smilodon on my tail h-he'll realize the meal that he wants to make of my flesh is all in his head."

Bullshit.

Struggle for survival > everything else >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> social psychology.

You need to keep the animal from eating you because of ego boundaries. In the same sense, the animal also has to keep hunting for food to keep its ego boundary, although an animal is obviously not conscious of such things. It happens to be that you will need to do what ever it takes to maintain a sense of "I".

On the fundamental level, the ego is an illusion. There is no real difference between you and I and everything else in the universe. The ego is just a trick invented by the brain to keep ourselves separated from everything else. And it also happens to be controlling us.

[Grendel]

You need to keep the animal from eating you because of ego boundaries. In the same sense, the animal also has to keep hunting for food to keep its ego boundary, although an animal is obviously not conscious of such things. It happens to be that you will need to do what ever it takes to maintain a sense of "I".

On the fundamental level, the ego is an illusion. There is no real difference between you and I and everything else in the universe. The ego is just a trick invented by the brain to keep ourselves separated from everything else. And it also happens to be controlling us.

You're still implicitly stating that all will be well in the world if we just let the potential hungry predators consume us by lowering our defenses, possibly under the pretense that predators no longer exist in our civilized world. Which, as anyone who bothered to watch the video I posted will know, would be a false assumption to make in a universe of finite resources where life forms must always compete for energy.



Does the "ego" encompass our understanding of physics? Biology? Thermodynamics? Even simple logic? If so, then it naturally encompasses psychology as well, since the mechanisms behind psychology are built upon the foundations of chemistry, physics, and logic. Hell, if debating is even what you're doing, the reasoning behind your argument (by virtue of it being reasoning) would fall into the realm of logic, which as your reasoning would imply is merely a figment of the Ego.

[Jarno]

A man is terretorial just like a cat or a lion etc. In the old days there were not many people so they didn't encounter eachother a lot.

Nowadays the earth is massively overpopulated, so people get more easely into conflict with eachother. You can't help it, it's in our nature, and it should be. If a cat gave up his territory because he didn't want to fight, he would have no dinner.

The solution: 1 child policies until we have half billion people on the planet, like in the time in the past when there were no wars.

[ClownsandEntropy]

A man is terretorial just like a cat or a lion etc. In the old days there were not many people so they didn't encounter eachother a lot.

Nowadays the earth is massively overpopulated, so people get more easely into conflict with eachother. You can't help it, it's in our nature, and it should be. If a cat gave up his territory because he didn't want to fight, he would have no dinner.

The solution: 1 child policies until we have half billion people on the planet, like in the time in the past when there were no wars.

I think that, because humans evolved in the "hunter-gatherer society"-like element, we are probably close to living in communities with people, and having hierarchies and relationships with people. I can imagine that we might be skeptical of new groups we haven't met, but I don't think we are territorial in the way that a lion is. We are much more tied to our tribes than our territory.

As an aside, a one child policy - or any type of population control (<-is there a socially acceptable word for this?) is an interesting policy with both moral and practical issues. I mean, ignoring what happens what you do if people break the law, will this lead to large older population who need support from their one grandchild (The 4-2-1 Problem)?

Also, interesting is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Emperor_Syndrome

[jingo]

Shadow, other. The accept you parts that aren' gpod amd then you will be ok with others.

[Jarno]

I think that, because humans evolved in the "hunter-gatherer society"-like element, we are probably close to living in communities with people, and having hierarchies and relationships with people. I can imagine that we might be skeptical of new groups we haven't met, but I don't think we are territorial in the way that a lion is. We are much more tied to our tribes than our territory.

As an aside, a one child policy - or any type of population control (<-is there a socially acceptable word for this?) is an interesting policy with both moral and practical issues. I mean, ignoring what happens what you do if people break the law, will this lead to large older population who need support from their one grandchild (The 4-2-1 Problem)?

Sure I can see how tribe is more important than territory. At least in that time. Just a remark, in Hunter Gatherer societies there was no hierarchy, those societies were egalitarian. The only ones on the planet.

Yes there is a huge problem if you would incorporate 1 child policies. A lot of things are based on ever lasting growth of population like the pensions you mentioned. This is simple a design fault, it makes us dependable on ever lasting growth, which is impossible. So the system we are following is pretty fragile.

Ah yes I can see the little emperor syndrome, and a lot of other things to be problematic, thanks for the link!

[Rebelondeck]

Fear and a feeling of personal impotence is what drives tribal (gang) mentality; religion comprises the largest tribes with politics second. It's ironic that insecurity placed us at the top of the food chain. The most aggressive countries are where the population feels the least secure. What distinguishes their leaders is that they're the best at channeling fear. I believe the mantra is: Though we walk through the valley of death, we will fear no evil when we become the deadliest in the valley - you fight me, you fight my gang.....

a.k.a. I/O