Recently my wife's grandfather passed away. He was 93, so that's a good run. However, the saddest part is seeing what happens to the family. I've seen it happen before and I predicted it would happen: there's always one of these in every family... a douche. (I realize that since I'm an only child, I'm automatically the douche of my generation, but I'll only be douchey to myself, so I'm okay with that.)
The douche in my wife's family shall be called "Dick." Not so much to protect his identity, but because he's a dick. I take issue with a lot of things Dick says and does, but when it comes to treating his own family the way he does, it is down-right deplorable. I find myself wondering how our society got to this level. Morality came about as a social tool to ensure integrity amongst the tribes. It levels the playing field by setting forth rights and wrongs and evolution favored the altruistic and those who played fair... up to a point, it would seem. Obviously when society grows to a certain point, morality is left up to a government more than anything. Lots of things slip through the cracks, as is to be expected, so long as we live without an all-seeing government (which is becoming a thing of the past). Dick slipped through the evolutionary crack, apparently.
Only his own self-interest is on his mind. He displays no care for anyone else and goes so far as to publicly snub my wife's grandfather's girlfriend that took care of - and loved - my wife's grandfather for the last 10 years of his life. Without making this all about Dick, just some of his antics include: leaving the grieving girlfriend out of the obituary, attempting to "get his hands on the money" before she did, sending invitations to a memorial only to his upper-crust friends (not even family, and certainly not the girlfriend), and the big one being that he bought his house from his now-deceased father 10 years ago for $100,000, paid $40,000 of it, then stopped paying years ago. He had signed a quit claim deed with his father, leaving no legal action available to collect the money owed to him. Seems to me like any inheritance he feels entitled to has already been taken, and then some.
The level of hatred for this barely-human creature among his own family is understandably large.
Sometimes I wish evolution could take effect within a lifetime. I often wonder what our world would look like if we still had to struggle to survive. Oh sure, we struggle, but not much. With technology and medicine at the level they are, and always improving, our own advancements have become an integral part of our evolutionary standing in this world. But there's always a bit of pollution that comes with progress, isn't there?
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Gossip as an anthropological tool
How We Believe, 2nd Edition: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God
Just happened to have read a section of How We Believe:The Search for God in an Age of Science by Michael Shermer about how gossip is a tool of social control that we use to weigh our social investments in others.
This got me thinking that such an attitude toward gossip is actually quite healthy; it makes a lot of sense. An excerpt:
Shermer was speaking of the evolution of morality in society tens of thousands of years ago when groups of people were beginning to grow beyond the average of 150 people one knows closely enough to truly know well (a number which has been maintained into current times). There began to be a need for establishing the integrity of others whom we may not know well, or at all. He continues,
It goes on to say that part of the reason we gossip about celebrities is because the media makes them seem like someone close to us, someone we actually know.
It's very interesting stuff. On the other hand, I can see how gossip can easily go awry. Misinformation, misinterpretation, minor details being added or subtracted can lead to the propagation of inaccurate information about a person's social standing and integrity.
The flip side to that argument, though, is that the only person who every really holds the key to the truth is the subject of the gossip. The problem being, that person may find it in their interest to prevent a social ostracism for themselves by denying an allegation that is in fact true.
The saving grace of it all, however, is that one tidbit of gossip that casts a negative light on an otherwise untarnished social record poses no real danger to the overall reputation. The group of 150 or so individuals that know the "gossipee" well can add the gossip to the scale, as it were. If the balance tips in favor of the negative, perhaps there is some credence. If the balance favors the positive, perhaps the harsh rumor was false. Either way we could be mistaken, but statistical analysis would make the odds easier to decipher.
Just happened to have read a section of How We Believe:The Search for God in an Age of Science by Michael Shermer about how gossip is a tool of social control that we use to weigh our social investments in others.
This got me thinking that such an attitude toward gossip is actually quite healthy; it makes a lot of sense. An excerpt:
Morality most likely evolved in these tiny bands of 100 to 200 people as a form of reciprocal altruism, or I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine. But as Lincoln noted, men are not angels. There are cheaters. Individuals defect from social contracts. Reciprocal altruism, in the long run, only works when you know who will cooperate through a complex feedback loop of communication among members of the community. (This also helps to explain why people in big cities can get away with being rude, inconsiderate, and uncooperative-they are anonymous and thus not subject to the normal checks and balances that come with seeing the same people every day.)
Shermer was speaking of the evolution of morality in society tens of thousands of years ago when groups of people were beginning to grow beyond the average of 150 people one knows closely enough to truly know well (a number which has been maintained into current times). There began to be a need for establishing the integrity of others whom we may not know well, or at all. He continues,
In order to play the game of reciprocation you need to know whose back needs scratching and who you will trust to scratch yours. This information is gathered through telling stories about other people, better known as gossip. From an anthropologist's perspective, gossip is a tool of social control through communicating cultural norms, as Jerome Barkow observed: "Reputation is determined by gossip, and the casual conversations of others affect one's relative standing and one's acceptability as a mate or as a partner in social exchange. IN Euro-American society, gossiping may at times be publicly disvalued and disowned, but it remains a favorite pastime, as it no doubt is in all human societies."
It goes on to say that part of the reason we gossip about celebrities is because the media makes them seem like someone close to us, someone we actually know.
It's very interesting stuff. On the other hand, I can see how gossip can easily go awry. Misinformation, misinterpretation, minor details being added or subtracted can lead to the propagation of inaccurate information about a person's social standing and integrity.
The flip side to that argument, though, is that the only person who every really holds the key to the truth is the subject of the gossip. The problem being, that person may find it in their interest to prevent a social ostracism for themselves by denying an allegation that is in fact true.
The saving grace of it all, however, is that one tidbit of gossip that casts a negative light on an otherwise untarnished social record poses no real danger to the overall reputation. The group of 150 or so individuals that know the "gossipee" well can add the gossip to the scale, as it were. If the balance tips in favor of the negative, perhaps there is some credence. If the balance favors the positive, perhaps the harsh rumor was false. Either way we could be mistaken, but statistical analysis would make the odds easier to decipher.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)