4 ms·

In the brain, serotonin seems to be deeply related to social status. This is Jordan Peterson's bit about lobsters - it's so ubiquitous that even lobsters share

In the brain, serotonin seems to be deeply related to social status. This is Jordan Peterson's bit about lobsters - it's so ubiquitous that even lobsters share the same mechanism. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-022-01378-2 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.94.11.5939 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.94.11.5939

amelius 3y ago
How do you explain that some people are not sensitive to social status?
- stbede 3y ago
  Can you elaborate?
- graeme 3y ago
  That it's a false belief. One of two things happens in those cases: 1. That person is in some way sad regardless of what they profess, or 2. They have their own subgroup where they rate status according to the status rankings of the subgroup. This can include rejecting the status hierarchy of the mainstream, but this itself is a status play With the internet this sub group can now be entirely online. But there does not exist such a thing as someone entirely insensitive to social status. If you posit there is, can you name an example of such a person?
  - another_story 3y ago
    Not OP, but I've known/taught autistic kids who would seem to fall under that umbrella.
  - blueflow 3y ago
    Yes, i could. Several coworkers. But due to their nature, they are largely invisible (they do not care about being seen, validated or represented) if you aren't seeing them in person. And i, myself, would probably also qualify.
    - graeme 3y ago
      I meant more of a historical or public figure, where the claim could be assessed to some degree. Because "do not care" is internal and can only really be judged indirectly. Saying "I do not care" is one of those things where it can both genuinely be said or where it is a countersignal. The claim is NOT however "does this person care about the esteem of their coworkers" or "does this person care to be seen". Status can be had in other ways. For example, you work, you write on Hacker news, you have 3,000+ karma - no easy feat. One way of measuring status would be whether you were pleased or disappointed by someone's reaction to something you did. Either in person or virtually. Whether for work, a hobby, or for fun. This truly is not an experience you have?
      - svnt 3y ago
        This appears to be broadening the definition to avoid losing the contested point. Lobsters also have a sex drive, but not everything is sexual.
        graeme 3y ago
        The original claim is that some people are not "sensitive to status". It was an incredibly broad claim. I would agree with weaker claims such as "many people care less about status" or "many people ignore loss of status to pursue other goals".
        svnt 3y ago
        Some people are asexual.
      - blueflow 3y ago
        > For example, you work, you write on Hacker news, you have 3,000+ karma - no easy feat. I'm procrastinating because my dayjob is boring. Isn't this what all people on HN do? Edit: Implication, do you write for social status? You even have a bio and use your actual name. > One way of measuring status would be whether you were pleased or disappointed by someone's reaction to something you did. I laugh when i deliver some good burn. But that's not gaining social status, its just being mean.
  - psychomugs 3y ago
    Sounds project-y.
- koonsolo 3y ago
  This reminds me of a buddhist story that goes something like this: (tried to look it up but couldn't find it, chatgpt also didn't know) There is this man and his brother is a monk. So he tells this monk "if you please the king, you don't have to live on rice and water anymore", where the monk replies: "if you learn to live on rice and water, you don't need to please the king".
  - HPsquared 3y ago
    Also the meeting of Diogenes with Alexander the Great.
    - p3rls 3y ago
      Aristippus* how it usually goes (from the other diogenes)
- strikelaserclaw 3y ago
  we can override our primitive impulses with rationality, i don't believe there is anyone who doesn't see social status at all, i just think that they have such control over their faculties that they can override their default instinct.
  - blueflow 3y ago
    Plausible explanation, and i can add a reason why people would want to override it: It opens up new dimensions of freedoms in terms of lifestyle. You can make more extreme decisions if you don't need to impress others.
    - strikelaserclaw 3y ago
      i agree, to be a truly independent thinker means your ideas won't be acknowledged for a period of time if ever, to not care what other people think seem to be the hall mark for truly creative people.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  Why would people try to explain something that hasn't been shown? Find a study or do a study that detects (and defines) variations in sensitivity to social status, and if they have detected some people that are completely immune, examine those people for differences from the people that are not. But as it is, it sounds like "but how can you explain that Jesus rose from the dead?"

amelius 3y ago

How do you explain that some people are not sensitive to social status?

stbede 3y ago
Can you elaborate?
graeme 3y ago
That it's a false belief. One of two things happens in those cases: 1. That person is in some way sad regardless of what they profess, or 2. They have their own subgroup where they rate status according to the status rankings of the subgroup. This can include rejecting the status hierarchy of the mainstream, but this itself is a status play With the internet this sub group can now be entirely online. But there does not exist such a thing as someone entirely insensitive to social status. If you posit there is, can you name an example of such a person?
- another_story 3y ago
  Not OP, but I've known/taught autistic kids who would seem to fall under that umbrella.
- blueflow 3y ago
  Yes, i could. Several coworkers. But due to their nature, they are largely invisible (they do not care about being seen, validated or represented) if you aren't seeing them in person. And i, myself, would probably also qualify.
  - graeme 3y ago
    I meant more of a historical or public figure, where the claim could be assessed to some degree. Because "do not care" is internal and can only really be judged indirectly. Saying "I do not care" is one of those things where it can both genuinely be said or where it is a countersignal. The claim is NOT however "does this person care about the esteem of their coworkers" or "does this person care to be seen". Status can be had in other ways. For example, you work, you write on Hacker news, you have 3,000+ karma - no easy feat. One way of measuring status would be whether you were pleased or disappointed by someone's reaction to something you did. Either in person or virtually. Whether for work, a hobby, or for fun. This truly is not an experience you have?
    - svnt 3y ago
      This appears to be broadening the definition to avoid losing the contested point. Lobsters also have a sex drive, but not everything is sexual.
      - graeme 3y ago
        The original claim is that some people are not "sensitive to status". It was an incredibly broad claim. I would agree with weaker claims such as "many people care less about status" or "many people ignore loss of status to pursue other goals".
        svnt 3y ago
        Some people are asexual.
    - blueflow 3y ago
      > For example, you work, you write on Hacker news, you have 3,000+ karma - no easy feat. I'm procrastinating because my dayjob is boring. Isn't this what all people on HN do? Edit: Implication, do you write for social status? You even have a bio and use your actual name. > One way of measuring status would be whether you were pleased or disappointed by someone's reaction to something you did. I laugh when i deliver some good burn. But that's not gaining social status, its just being mean.
- psychomugs 3y ago
  Sounds project-y.
koonsolo 3y ago
This reminds me of a buddhist story that goes something like this: (tried to look it up but couldn't find it, chatgpt also didn't know) There is this man and his brother is a monk. So he tells this monk "if you please the king, you don't have to live on rice and water anymore", where the monk replies: "if you learn to live on rice and water, you don't need to please the king".
- HPsquared 3y ago
  Also the meeting of Diogenes with Alexander the Great.
  - p3rls 3y ago
    Aristippus* how it usually goes (from the other diogenes)
strikelaserclaw 3y ago
we can override our primitive impulses with rationality, i don't believe there is anyone who doesn't see social status at all, i just think that they have such control over their faculties that they can override their default instinct.
- blueflow 3y ago
  Plausible explanation, and i can add a reason why people would want to override it: It opens up new dimensions of freedoms in terms of lifestyle. You can make more extreme decisions if you don't need to impress others.
  - strikelaserclaw 3y ago
    i agree, to be a truly independent thinker means your ideas won't be acknowledged for a period of time if ever, to not care what other people think seem to be the hall mark for truly creative people.
pessimizer 3y ago
Why would people try to explain something that hasn't been shown? Find a study or do a study that detects (and defines) variations in sensitivity to social status, and if they have detected some people that are completely immune, examine those people for differences from the people that are not. But as it is, it sounds like "but how can you explain that Jesus rose from the dead?"