The loved one is in their Monkeysphere, the strangers are not. People are going to save the family member.
Linked article is old, formatting’s hosed. Not sure I’ve read anything that was as eye opening regarding human behavior. If you internalize the concept, you’ll see it in action every day, understand so much of our conduct.
I feel like this way of understanding sociology can explain highly individualistic behavior, but it’s a stretch to say that evey human interaction is highly individualistic (or rather “in-group” thinking). I’m sure we can agree that SOME human interactions do not fit this pattern and I even think it’s MOST of human interactions.
“Who would be nice or considerate to a person they don’t know and never will meet again?” well actually quite a lot.
Nah, I think you’re taking my opinion way too far. I’m only saying that much of our behavior is explained here, more so than I’ve seen in any other single theory. Sure, we’re far more complex than a Cracked article can explain, but that’s a lotta bang for the buck in a single notion.
No, we’re not absolutely ruled by the Monkeysphere, but it sure explains a lot of fuckery.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who remembers that lovely article. It was probably the first thing I ever read that really changed my mind about osama bin laden, and it wasn’t even the writer’s point.
I honestly disagree that the best case scenario is to kill three strangers to save a loved one.
I still haven’t seen someone on lemmy bring up the trolley problem while understanding the trolley problem.
The loved one is in their Monkeysphere, the strangers are not. People are going to save the family member.
Linked article is old, formatting’s hosed. Not sure I’ve read anything that was as eye opening regarding human behavior. If you internalize the concept, you’ll see it in action every day, understand so much of our conduct.
I feel like this way of understanding sociology can explain highly individualistic behavior, but it’s a stretch to say that evey human interaction is highly individualistic (or rather “in-group” thinking). I’m sure we can agree that SOME human interactions do not fit this pattern and I even think it’s MOST of human interactions.
“Who would be nice or considerate to a person they don’t know and never will meet again?” well actually quite a lot.
Nah, I think you’re taking my opinion way too far. I’m only saying that much of our behavior is explained here, more so than I’ve seen in any other single theory. Sure, we’re far more complex than a Cracked article can explain, but that’s a lotta bang for the buck in a single notion.
No, we’re not absolutely ruled by the Monkeysphere, but it sure explains a lot of fuckery.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who remembers that lovely article. It was probably the first thing I ever read that really changed my mind about osama bin laden, and it wasn’t even the writer’s point.
Yeah, that’s a scary thing to make a foregone conclusion. “It’s best for you that 3 strangers die.”