4 ms·

Consider a herd of grazing mammals. All young, are by the very nature of the stage of life, easy prey. Now imagine social capabilities - the ability to communic

Consider a herd of grazing mammals. All young, are by the very nature of the stage of life, easy prey. Now imagine social capabilities - the ability to communicate distress and cooperation to others. Anyone not capable of these abilities, with any weakness at all, could be singled out - to be fed to the wolves. Social abilities become a weapon, to vandalize an outlier of the group. This theory should be easily testable. If another member of society - which signals frailty (old, handicapped, etc.) is present to this group, the bullying should significantly reduced or even cease.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
CuriouslyC 6y ago
Except that humans didn't evolve as herd grazers avoiding predators. In this case, it's asserting social dominance in order to get first access to resources.
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  What resources does the top bully at the school get?
  - fuzzfactor 6y ago
    Admiration from the lesser bullies.
  - CuriouslyC 6y ago
    Invitations to parties/social gatherings, access to to toys or sporting equipment, and once they're in high school, women.
Viliam1234 6y ago
This explains some aspects of bullying, but not all. Specifically, quoting the article, why "those who are not necessarily friends, but who share many friends in common — are also more likely to bully or otherwise victimize each other"? Maybe people you don't have enough friends in common with feel like a different herd, and people have instict to bully the weakest member of their own herd, but don't care about other herds as much. Maybe it's because bullying a member of your herd allows you to rise to the top of your herd (which is the assumption of the article), while bullying a member of a different herd does not. Or maybe because when you start bullying a member of a different herd, the whole victim's herd may collectively turn against you ("yeah, he may be a loser, but he is our loser, so back off"), while bullying a member of your own herd is safe in this aspect. (Unless your herd has a strong leader who opposes internal fighting -- rarely happens with kids.) So the testable prediction would be like: If you have a classroom with e.g. 29 white students and 1 black student, the white students will bully the black one. (Unless there is someone more visibly different, e.g. handicapped or speaking a foreign language.) But if you have 15 white students and 15 black students, more likely the white students will pick a white victim to bully, and the black students will pick a black victim to bully. (Unless the class is more split along some other trait than race. In which case e.g. the English-speaking students would pick an English-speaking victim, and the French-speaking students would pick a French-speaking victim.)

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

CuriouslyC 6y ago

Except that humans didn't evolve as herd grazers avoiding predators. In this case, it's asserting social dominance in order to get first access to resources.

oh_sigh 6y ago
What resources does the top bully at the school get?
- fuzzfactor 6y ago
  Admiration from the lesser bullies.
- CuriouslyC 6y ago
  Invitations to parties/social gatherings, access to to toys or sporting equipment, and once they're in high school, women.

Viliam1234 6y ago

This explains some aspects of bullying, but not all. Specifically, quoting the article, why "those who are not necessarily friends, but who share many friends in common — are also more likely to bully or otherwise victimize each other"? Maybe people you don't have enough friends in common with feel like a different herd, and people have instict to bully the weakest member of their own herd, but don't care about other herds as much. Maybe it's because bullying a member of your herd allows you to rise to the top of your herd (which is the assumption of the article), while bullying a member of a different herd does not. Or maybe because when you start bullying a member of a different herd, the whole victim's herd may collectively turn against you ("yeah, he may be a loser, but he is our loser, so back off"), while bullying a member of your own herd is safe in this aspect. (Unless your herd has a strong leader who opposes internal fighting -- rarely happens with kids.) So the testable prediction would be like: If you have a classroom with e.g. 29 white students and 1 black student, the white students will bully the black one. (Unless there is someone more visibly different, e.g. handicapped or speaking a foreign language.) But if you have 15 white students and 15 black students, more likely the white students will pick a white victim to bully, and the black students will pick a black victim to bully. (Unless the class is more split along some other trait than race. In which case e.g. the English-speaking students would pick an English-speaking victim, and the French-speaking students would pick a French-speaking victim.)