Thread: Natural Hierarchies vs Artificial Hierarchies

Results 1 to 5 of 5

  1. #1
    Join Date Apr 2009
    Location Earth
    Posts 4,020
    Rep Power 0

    Lightbulb Natural Hierarchies vs Artificial Hierarchies

    Another awesome post by Division By Zer0:

    A Redditor asks:

    I just think back to my earliest times of hanging out with friends, organizing baseball games, and working on group projects, and the utility and convenience of creating hierarchies seems like a part of the “natural order”
    Another responds:

    The hierarchies you speak of are, in many ways biological. Packing orders of other primates (baboons for example) also have hierarchical social systems. This doesn’t mean that they are desirable or unavoidable.


    There are many natural symbiotic systems (bees and flowers for example) which are purely cooperative, with no top-down, pyramid hierarchies. They are complex systems and each entity needs to maximize it’s own natural abilities to take advantage of the others’ but in taking advantage of one another, neither entity is put at a disadvantage.


    Even in primate packs there are no artificial governing rules that the individuals follow, they evolve naturally based on genetic predispositions of strength and intellect as well as factors like age and sex.


    But one of the major evolutionary stepping stones on the way to becoming homo sapiens sapiens was the evolved ability of homo erectus so-called beta pack members to band together and form units that were, through strength in numbers, able to overpower individual alpha male “rulers” to form egalitarian hunter-gatherer communities that could successfully fend of warring packs and hunt large mammals without aid of alpha males or single centralized leadership.


    This particular trait precipitated many evolutionary milestones in communication and technology. Coordinated hunts, for instance, require linguistic ability which in turn breeds technological advances.


    That is not to say they didn’t have leadership or complex social structures it’s just that the responsibilities of leadership were divided amongst many and the social structures naturally evolved from that. This made homo erectus one of the most successful and long-lived species of hominid of all time, as well as, gave rise to the most successful branch of the homo genus and the entire Animalia kingdom – modern day humans.


    And while modern day humans retain the tendency for hierarchical pecking orders inherited from primate orders that are still visible today, that tendency is, in fact, a primitive feature, like the opposable thumb.


    Cooperation and egalitarianism are derived, advanced features, like the opposable pinky.



    I agree with the last response, and was wondering what others made of it.
    To speculate is human; to hedge, divine
  2. #2
    Join Date Aug 2005
    Location Richmond, VA
    Posts 6,143
    Organisation
    I.M.C.C.
    Rep Power 49

    Default

    I agree with the last response, and was wondering what others made of it.
    What is it saying? That cooperative activity is nonsense ("opposable pinky") or that is is an advanced organization of human society (advanced derivative)?

    Either case is incredibly obtuse. Primates have characteristics of hierarchy and egalitarianism, but the notable character of the human being is their persistent drive to maintain personal sovereignty over their social (labor and economic) life. Furthermore, primates and humans have always been noted for their development of social systems.

    This is the inwardly looking paradigm - that is human social organization which seeks collective goods and interests - which is distinct from the outwardly looking paradigm of competitive social organization.

    Insofar as we maintain the latter, latent human functions of hierarchy will manifest as modes of greater competitive systematization.
  3. #3
    Join Date Apr 2009
    Location Earth
    Posts 4,020
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    What is it saying? That cooperative activity is nonsense ("opposable pinky") or that is is an advanced organization of human society (advanced derivative)?
    The latter
    To speculate is human; to hedge, divine
  4. #4
    Join Date Oct 2008
    Posts 4,026
    Organisation
    dildo factory workers local 127
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I'd like to see some more detailed information on this.
  5. #5
    Join Date Feb 2010
    Posts 718
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I'd like to see some more detailed information on this.
    Read Kropotkin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_...r_of_Evolution and Marx's materialist critique of history Or Fosters "Marx's Ecology" http://monthlyreview.org/books/marxecology.php or Bookchins "The Ecology Of Freedom; The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy" http://www.akpress.org/2004/items/ecologyoffreedom

Similar Threads

  1. Artificial Intelligence
    By jasmine in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 6th October 2008, 16:33
  2. Artificial Enemy
    By ÑóẊîöʼn in forum Theory
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 7th January 2004, 03:18
  3. So-called artificial famine in the Ukraine
    By Anti-Fascist in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 17th November 2003, 09:14
  4. Natural Evil vs. Moral Evil - For those that think "natural
    By Ghost Writer in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 20th June 2003, 17:28

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts