3 ms·
Sure. Loners and isolated people are less useful, but they are also non-threatening beyond stochastic violent events. They may develop undesirable ideas or id
by germinalphrase 6y ago
Sure. Loners and isolated people are less useful, but they are also non-threatening beyond stochastic violent events. They may develop undesirable ideas or ideologies, but that’s generally irrelevant due to their social isolation.
- watwut 6y agoThen again, it is not all strictly rational. If you are primed to look for internal ennemy then loners easily look like ones. Plus, maybe more importantly, they don't have stronger friends to protect them, to retaliate, to subtly help them. They are also less likely to be fully "in", so more likely to do misstep. I also remember reading that people who saved Jews during WWII were more likely to be "outsiders" to social. (Some Israel researcher claimed that.) Being outside facilitates such actions - either because you underestimate risk or because you did not absorbed the bad values.
- germinalphrase 6y agoYes - I certainly agree that loners are more vulnerable. I might argue that “outsider” is a broader category though and more likely garner the (destructive) attention of the dominant group.