> What does it have to do with individualism or collectivism? Why are you bringing an opinion of Sapolsky as if he was an important person? This proves my poin

> What does it have to do with individualism or collectivism? Why are you bringing an opinion of Sapolsky as if he was an important person? This proves my point, you think like a collectivist, the individual doesn't matter much to you. Besides, the reason I posted that article is because I wanted to give you some reference to understand the construct I'm talking about (a bit of "meta" so to speak), so that you can orient your thinking and it didn't have anything to do with Sapolsky or his "importance" (seems like this matters to you more than actual facts). It seems like you're a collectivist AND not intellectually curious (they usually go hand in hand though). Your grammar and "philosophy" sounds very Asian. Most of your thinking revolves around "for the greater good (of the country)". Your determination of the "border" for benefiting from "greater good" seems arbitrary, why not the whole world? As an individualist, my advice to you is: do whatever feels right to you. If you're truly for the greater good of the country, who are you to decide what the country has to do? and why should I care about your opinion? whats the proof that what you say is actually happening?