4 ms·
Because you still have things you're for and against. But they shouldn't be aligned along trivial lines like sports, religion and politics. And yeah I know call
by slver 5y ago
Because you still have things you're for and against. But they shouldn't be aligned along trivial lines like sports, religion and politics. And yeah I know calling these "trivial" sounds odd, but they really are.
- simonh 5y agoOn the contrary I think splitting society on trivial lines is exactly what we need to encourage. It’s healthy and beneficial. Not everyone has to care about the same sports, the same hobbies, the same tv shows or even the same politics. Two people can support different football teams, but still serve in the same army side by side, or work for the same company. They can support different politics and even be friends. Yes really. Erasing group identities is user dumb. Why not just promote and encourage tolerant civilised behaviour. Since when did that become unthinkable? Well, we need to buckle down and think it. That is the way forward.
- BobbyJo 5y agoThere's a balance in there that needs to be struck on practical grounds. You don't get groups without in-group bias. You don't get in-group bias without prejudice. Getting rid of groups/tribes/whatever is obviously impossible, but the more you temper how much human identity is derived from them, the more you reduce the downstream negative (and positive) effects. They aren't all good, and they aren't all bad, like everything else. You can't have all the good without the bad unfortunately.
- BobbyJo 5y agoI don't get how that's tribalism but with everyone in the same tribe.
- mantas 5y ago... and who ensures that everybody has for and against the same things? Even twins raised together sometimes end up complete opposites.
- mensetmanusman 5y agoEverything is trivial?