3 ms·
I know I’m going against the grain here, but I’ve always been suspicious of people who claim that humans are a “social animal.” Thing is, the concept is a conti
by DLWormwood 16y ago
I know I’m going against the grain here, but I’ve always been suspicious of people who claim that humans are a “social animal.” Thing is, the concept is a continuum, yet most people who say it mean it in a context like ants, bees and bonobo apes, when I happen to believe that the social behavior of lions and wolves is more apt. (Humans are best off in small family clusters, with significant periods of time in their life alone or paired off.) Humans have engaged in antisocial and asocial activities (monasteries, homesteads, and hermitage) for all of recorded history, and I resent those today who seem to delight in trying to make other gregarious like themselves.
- philwelch 16y agoMonasteries and homesteads have never attracted a significant proportion of the population, and they're not all that solitary, either. Humans are a social animal, and if you're not convinced of that, study the psychological effects of feral children and solitary confinement.
- DLWormwood 16y agoRead what I wrote more closely. I didn’t say “no contacts,” I said “few.” Being social doesn’t imply packing our “monkeyspheres” to the 100 person maximum that the social butterflies seem to want to subject everybody to.
- metamemetics 16y agoPost-neolithic age humans are easily the most social animal in existence!!! Any human that does not grow or hunt their own food is a social animal whose existence depends on a large interacting society. Even monks in remote monastaries rely on support from churches who need priests with good communication skills to put the fear of god into as many people as possible to exist.