Comment by socrates1998 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by socrates1998 | Hacker News Reader

My unscientific guess is that the mutation allowed for greater group dependence and cohesion. This article and Harari's book sort of dance around this, but I think it's some type of emotional gene that we are emotionally hard wired to NEED to connect with people. Like a tiger stalks with your back turned to it, people emotionally need to be connected to other people in a deep, meaningful way.

Humans are not only unique in their abilities like problems solving and language, but also in their 100% dedication to the tribe.

I think it is this combination that allows for us to work together in such large groups and successfully.

Harari calls it "fictions" that bind us together, but that doesn't quite seem to work for me.

The question I ask is WHY do these "fictions" work so well?

Why would a Nebraska farmer go half way across the world and climb French beaches with German guns shooting at him?

Why are we so compelled to identify with a group?

A comedian has a great joke about this. Essentially, the WORST thing you can do to a person is put them in solitary confinement. Even being surrounded by criminals and prison guards is infinity better than being forced to be alone in a room. We desperately need to connect with people. It seems hard wired genetically to me.

I think culture helps serve this purpose of binding us together.

Art, music, theatre, and even sports are all a part of the process of group cohesion.

Group cohesion and dependency is so powerful that it's often the number one factor in determining which societies/countries/groups come out victorious with intergroup conflict.

A great book called "War and Peace and War" by Peter Turchin is a fantastic book to read if this concept interests you.

Another one, "Tribe" by Sebastion Junger also explores this topic.

"A comedian has a great joke about this. Essentially, the WORST thing you can do to a person is put them in solitary confinement. Even being surrounded by criminals and prison guards is infinity better than being forced to be alone in a room. We desperately need to connect with people. It seems hard wired genetically to me."

My unscientific response to this is that it's more a personality dependency. Our personality or individuality is dependent on other individuals so when you your all alone your ego starts to disolve and all your skills and attributes that depend on ego start to fade. Most people would experience this as going insane.

Cohesion in large groups are aided by strong personalities that create and sustain larger groups(hierarchies) and than in turn enables larger groups.

Sure, they are some people who are okay with being alone and would be okay with living on a desert island without other people around, but I think these are much fewer people than most people think.

Even people who claim to hate other people find it very difficult to work in environments where their work is unappreciated or useless.

Almost no one in the world would be happy digging a ditch and refilling it the next day and repeating it even if they were paid $1000 a day to do it.

Why is that? Why would a programmer who isn't very social want only work on stuff that is useful to other people?

It's because the vast majority of us are hard wired to be useful to society and other people. We desperately need to feel some connection to others.

The only way digging a ditch and filling it in would be satisfying is if you knew you were taking care of your family by doing it.

>Cohesion in large groups are aided by strong personalities that create and sustain larger groups(hierarchies) and than in turn enables larger groups.

I completely disagree. Cohesion is stronger in small, less hierarchal groups.

The key is grouping groups together.

Why did the American states unite and form the USA and the Greek city states before the rise of Macedonia not?

It's not an easy question to answer, but strong man personalities doesn't seem like it's an answer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com