4 ms·

There have been myriad societies that consciously chose to dispense with hierarchy, others where hierarchy applied only to one sphere (e.g. religion) and nowher

There have been myriad societies that consciously chose to dispense with hierarchy, others where hierarchy applied only to one sphere (e.g. religion) and nowhere else, ones where different hierarchies applied in different spheres, and many where hierarchy comes and goes, with no continuity with previous hierarchies. To be human is to have the power to consciously choose behavior.

fckgnad 4y ago
I think those societies are rare and observations of those societies are inaccurate. There must be hierarchies in those societies, it's just misreported. More evidence of the relationship between hierarchy and biology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXxKBiidbeo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXxKBiidbeo Serotonin is the biological chemical that is linked with hierarchy in biology and we are awashed in it.
- mcswell 4y ago
  This sort of argument--that those reports must be inaccurate, because--well, I'm not sure why you you think these reports are inaccurate, except that you think they must be. And that's not a reason. I'm also pretty sure any linkage of serotonin to hierarchy is unproven.
  - fckgnad 4y ago
    >This sort of argument--that those reports must be inaccurate, because--well, I'm not sure why you you think these reports are inaccurate, except that you think they must be. And that's not a reason. It's happened before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead and not just with her. It's more prevalent in anthropology then in other sciences. This is just an educated guess. If you provide actual sources I can verify what the academic community thinks of these reports or findings, and really that's the only best available metric I can go off of. >I'm also pretty sure any linkage of serotonin to hierarchy is unproven. Science cannot prove anything. Be very careful with your language. Especially in the social sciences where things are less quantitative... proof is fundamentally impossible. There is only evidence in favor of and evidence against. Evidence in favor of serotonin and hierarchy: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anna-Ziomkiewicz-2/publication/310586509_Serotonin_and_Dominance/links/5a9ec355a6fdcc22e2cb3a14/Serotonin-and-Dominance.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anna-Ziomkiewicz-2/publ... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959438810001261 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09594...
goatlover 4y ago
Almost every single group I've been part of had leaders. They may have been elected by the group, or more often, appointed elsewhere. The ones that don't have leadership tend to be temporary and disorganized. In situations where this is less temporary, leaders often emerge naturally, as that's how humans typically organize themselves. We have conscious choice, sure, but that doesn't change the fact that we're part of larger systems that we only have some influence over. It also doesn't change the fact that conscious choice is somewhat biologically driven.
- moloch-hai 4y ago
  How many of these groups were of people who did not grow up with fixed hierarchies, and so had developed organizational skills that did not rely on one? A hierarchy is the laziest choice among ways to organize.
  - fckgnad 4y ago
    Hierarchies are places where one relies on many. That is the point of a hierarchy... so that a few can control and rely on many. It is the most unfair way to organize.
    - moloch-hai 4y ago
      It is thus very, very convenient for the few that people are conditioned from childhood to believe it is the only way to organize, and announce it freely in print.
      - fckgnad 4y ago
        A child is well aware of the parent-child hierarchy that is more or less universal across all modern cultures. You've been conditioned by this book to follow a fringe belief.
        moloch-hai 4y ago
        [flagged]

fckgnad 4y ago

I think those societies are rare and observations of those societies are inaccurate. There must be hierarchies in those societies, it's just misreported. More evidence of the relationship between hierarchy and biology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXxKBiidbeo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXxKBiidbeo Serotonin is the biological chemical that is linked with hierarchy in biology and we are awashed in it.

mcswell 4y ago
This sort of argument--that those reports must be inaccurate, because--well, I'm not sure why you you think these reports are inaccurate, except that you think they must be. And that's not a reason. I'm also pretty sure any linkage of serotonin to hierarchy is unproven.
- fckgnad 4y ago
  >This sort of argument--that those reports must be inaccurate, because--well, I'm not sure why you you think these reports are inaccurate, except that you think they must be. And that's not a reason. It's happened before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead and not just with her. It's more prevalent in anthropology then in other sciences. This is just an educated guess. If you provide actual sources I can verify what the academic community thinks of these reports or findings, and really that's the only best available metric I can go off of. >I'm also pretty sure any linkage of serotonin to hierarchy is unproven. Science cannot prove anything. Be very careful with your language. Especially in the social sciences where things are less quantitative... proof is fundamentally impossible. There is only evidence in favor of and evidence against. Evidence in favor of serotonin and hierarchy: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anna-Ziomkiewicz-2/publication/310586509_Serotonin_and_Dominance/links/5a9ec355a6fdcc22e2cb3a14/Serotonin-and-Dominance.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anna-Ziomkiewicz-2/publ... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959438810001261 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09594...

goatlover 4y ago

Almost every single group I've been part of had leaders. They may have been elected by the group, or more often, appointed elsewhere. The ones that don't have leadership tend to be temporary and disorganized. In situations where this is less temporary, leaders often emerge naturally, as that's how humans typically organize themselves. We have conscious choice, sure, but that doesn't change the fact that we're part of larger systems that we only have some influence over. It also doesn't change the fact that conscious choice is somewhat biologically driven.

moloch-hai 4y ago
How many of these groups were of people who did not grow up with fixed hierarchies, and so had developed organizational skills that did not rely on one? A hierarchy is the laziest choice among ways to organize.
- fckgnad 4y ago
  Hierarchies are places where one relies on many. That is the point of a hierarchy... so that a few can control and rely on many. It is the most unfair way to organize.
  - moloch-hai 4y ago
    It is thus very, very convenient for the few that people are conditioned from childhood to believe it is the only way to organize, and announce it freely in print.
    - fckgnad 4y ago
      A child is well aware of the parent-child hierarchy that is more or less universal across all modern cultures. You've been conditioned by this book to follow a fringe belief.
      - moloch-hai 4y ago
        [flagged]