Sheep logic (2017)
epsilontheory.com
epsilontheory.com
As someone who also keeps sheep, I have observed:
Sheep are kind to each other. Whenever we're working on a sheep, our head ewe always comes into the work area to inspect. She stands there and watches, baa's (I assume to let the sheep being worked on know that she's there - although maybe this is anthropomorphizing). She has been known to go find a sheep who can't figure out how to get through the gate and escort them through.
When you take the hay or grain out to the barn, what happens is that one sheep hears you, baa's, and everyone comes running. They jostle each other to get to the grain, but that doesn't last that long. Mostly, they stand side-by-side and eat; everybody gets some, as long as there's enough room.
No, I think what this guy actually wants to talk about is goat dynamics. You bring grain to the goats, the one that hears you doesn't make a sound. She just saunters into the barnyard, all suave, and eats her fill. If two or more goats hear you, then they all have to fight each other to see who gets to eat first. Every single day. For a goat, the sight of other goats eating grain is basically intolerable.
Both sheep and goats may well have evolved flock dynamics for all the reasons the author illustrates, e.g. they act in terms of their own personal self-interest, and not the collective. But there are several local minima in that evolutionary space, and they aren't all equal.
In my experience with goats, their salient feature is a maniacal and skillfully-executed desire to escape/vanish/get loose, typically at the most inopportune possible time.
This kinda breaks the metaphor, which is likely why the author used sheep instead.
Anthropomorphizing again, it looks like goats are more intelligent than sheep. But I'm not sure that's actually true; I think it's just that the same local minimum in the flock dynamics space that cause goats to fight each other for grain also causes them to be more inventive in their random walk through life.
When you house sheep and goats together, the sheep learn to do some of the same things the goats do. If you want to introduce your sheep to a new food, give it to the goats first. They'll eat it, the sheep will see them eating it, and then the sheep will eat it. I've seen goats stand on their back legs to get to the lower branches of trees. The sheep had never thought to do that on their own. But once they see the goats doing it, they try it too. That tells me the sheep aren't inherently less intelligent; there's just less variation in their nominal behavior.
So you’re biased ;)
"They don’t lead other sheep or form leadership structures like a pack because they don’t care about other sheep. Every sheep lives in a universe of One, which makes them just about the most non-obedient creature around."
This is incorrect. Sheep have a social structure. In every flock there is a head ewe. The head ewe decides when to leave the barn, where to go in the pasture, and when to head back for the night. There is a process for leaving the barn in the morning. The head ewe goes in front. Everyone else follows behind in more-or-less single file. If there is a ram in the flock, then he is last. The head ewe walks for a few steps, stops, looks around, sniffs the air, and everyone behind her patiently waits. Then a few steps more. It is a ten-minute process for my sheep to get from the barn to their favorite tree.
This does not invalidate the greater point that the author is making: there is, very definitely, a flock psychology. Sheep are not inclined to put themselves in danger to help one another, unless it's one of the ewe's lambs who is in danger: if that's the case, she will go to her death to stand down a wolf. And there's a truism among shepherds that the sheepdog knows to stay out of the way of a ewe and her lamb lest the dog get butted, hard. But in general, it doesn't make evolutionary sense for sheep to try to fight wolves. They lose.
But I suppose what I'm saying here is that, even within human flock psychology, there is room for people to help each other. Your enlightened self interest, at the very least, says that you shouldn't go out of your way to screw people over. You should alert others to dangers you see. You should follow the one with a better nose and more experience. You can't eat all of the grain yourself, so you might as well share it with others. A low bar, I know, but one we often fail to clear nonetheless.
In truth we are sheep, living by the logic of the flock.
Human beings have both modes. We are close relatives to chimpanzees, who will go together in a group with the specific goal of exterminating the next group. Human societies have a communal mode and a feudal mode. One is more egalitarian and communal. (But also hierarchical.) The other is more hierarchical. (But also communal.)
They very regularly patrol the borders of their territory. If they find an interloper, it's not so unusual for them to kill it.
Just curious what your comment is based on.
The dual nature of Japanese society (feudal/communal) is commented on in the West. However, there's nothing there which isn't also present in western societies. It's just easier for westerners to see it in a different culture.