Allegory of Justice punishing Injustice – Jean-Marc Nattier (Wikicommons). Initially, economic and social activity was organized among closely related individuals, a limitation that kept societies from realizing their full potential as they grew larger. Northwest Europeans and East Asians overcame this limitation through behavioral and mental changes.
I
have published an article on "the large society problem in Northwest
Europe and East Asia." Comments are welcome.
Abstract
Kinship
was the organizing principle of early societies, defining how people should
behave toward each other. Social and economic activity was thus organized
mostly among closely related individuals, a limitation that would keep
societies from realizing their full potential as they grew larger. The
"large society problem" has not been fully solved anywhere, but Northwest
Europeans and East Asians have gone the farthest toward a solution. In general,
the solution has been to weaken the relative importance of kinship and
strengthen forms of sociality that can include everyone, and not just close
kin. In particular, one must think and feel in certain ways, i.e., be
susceptible to social norms that are absolute, universal, and independent of
kinship; feel guilty after breaking social norms; feel empathy for non-kin; and
orient oneself toward society. This mindset shows similarities and differences
between Northwest Europeans and East Asians. Both groups adapted to a larger
social environment by becoming more empathetic toward non-kin and more
susceptible to universal social norms. Northwest Europeans became more
individualistic while acquiring stronger internal controls of behavior
(affective empathy, guilt proneness). East Asians became more collectivistic
while acquiring stronger internal controls (cognitive empathy) and stronger
external controls (shaming, family-community surveillance, inculcation of
normative behavior).
Reference
Frost,
P. (2020). The large society problem in Northwest Europe and East Asia. Advances in Anthropology 10(3): 214-134.
12 comments:
" https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32621306/
In this review, we summarize the recent archeogenomic reconstruction of population admixture in Europe and demonstrate that skin lightening happened as late as 5000 years ago through immigration of lighter pigmented populations from western Anatolia and the Russian steppe but not primarily via evolutionary pressure for vitamin D3 synthesis. We show that variations in genes encoding for proteins being responsible for the transport, metabolism and signalling of vitamin D provide alternative mechanisms of adaptation to a life in northern latitudes without suffering from consequences of vitamin D deficiency. This includes hypotheses explaining differences in the vitamin D status and response index of European populations."
Northwest Europeans seem more fractious, and creative. The Ancient Greeks had almost everything they needed (toy steam engines, the Antikythera mechanism). But the Greek city states tore each other to pieces.
The Western form of large scale cooperation is much more successful in the Long-Term.
A society of those with internal controls on behavior doesn't need strong societal prohibitions on being vicious. Hence the West could become an irreligious permissive society relying on innate self control more than culture. But immigrant communities of nonEuropean--or nonEast Asian--ancestry lacked the necessary genetic adaptations. The guilt created in Europeans by the nonEuropean failure to flourish in permissive European society motivates Europeans to destroy themselves by altruistic punishment
Hence the West could become an irreligious permissive society relying on innate self control more than culture...The guilt created in Europeans by the nonEuropean failure to flourish in permissive European society motivates Europeans to destroy themselves by altruistic punishment
The West has become an irreligious permissive society, but where's the evidence that it could do so without negative consequences to itself?
The most negatively affected by this new permissive society have been Western majorities.
Non-Europeans like blacks have been taking over politics, culture, and economics and are increasingly influential. That counts as "flourishing". The fact that the average black has trouble in school or with the law is immaterial since that's not how this population "flourishes" anyway; it's not their modus vivendi.
Peter, have you ever written on how east Asians developed their physical appearance?
The common explanation is an adaptation to cold weather, but I am skeptical this is the only factor.
''A society of those with internal controls on behavior doesn't need strong societal prohibitions on being vicious. Hence the West could become an irreligious permissive society relying on innate self control more than culture. But immigrant communities of nonEuropean--or nonEast Asian--ancestry lacked the necessary genetic adaptations. The guilt created in Europeans by the nonEuropean failure to flourish in permissive European society motivates Europeans to destroy themselves by altruistic punishment''
Most of civilizational european achievements has been thanks for sabotage, enslavement and resources exploitation on noneuropean peoples regardless if they, mostly, were capable or not to build complex societies. Right now thanks for altruistic innateness of people off color, millions of workers are being severily exploited by americans, europeans, japaneses enterprises in southern asia, latin america, India and subsaharian africa or their natural resources being drained to enrich parasitical ones in "first world" with the cumplicity of also parasitical local "elites".
Current White guilty is an umbalanced trial to sculpt some reasonableness into an european or derived european collective mindset... that's why cry because en masse immigration but defend past crimes commited by White guys make no rational sense at all...
There are conflicts of interests within the white population; the elite in white counties see the working class white majority as the most dangerous enemy. Blacks are an elite stick to beat relatively poor whites with, and non European immigration is a way to destroy poor whites as a political force.
The elites strategy has produced a reaction, as would be expected. Trump is tribune of the plebs sort of like the Gracchi of ancient Rome, but as in those cases the odd are against him. If history is any guide, there with be a suppression of democracy and open elite rule. The Democrats are the party of big business.
''The Democrats are the party of big business.''
Avg joey people are "cattle" specially those with "white" skin.
And republicans are what???
Majority of leftist people is not on the big business, so sorry.
Elites are divided in groups: economic, religious, political, academic//intellectual and artistic.
Among overwhelming "liberal" elites and groups: academic and artistic.
Very rich artists represent a tiny minority among artist professional category.
"Liberal" academics are mostly concentrated in humanities and remotely related departments and typical university teachers are not the richest amongst us.
Majority of true progressist people is on middle class.
Economic, religious and political elites are mostly "on the reich".
Neoliberal enterpeneurs are overly capitalistic to be classically "on the left".
"Conservative" elites are truly/historically against people: their basic rights, their dignity and real freedom (=/= irresponsibility). Trump is part of it.
Large society = big business, no?
"IN his new book The Weirdest People in the World, he claims that people who are Weird would complete the sentence 'I am...', with details such as 'curious' or 'a lawyer', whereas those who are not Weird would describe themselves in relation to others (e.g. I am Layla's cousin).
He argues that Weird people developed after the marriage customs of the Catholic Church led to the demolition of indigenous tribes and the rise of the nuclear family, individualism, protestantism, and constitutional government.[...] He says individuals are 'approach orientated' and keen to start new friendships outside of their set kin-based institution. Henrich points out that Weird people might depend on honing one's attributes, attracted friends, and sustaining relationships which could be mutually beneficial. Meanwhile in non-Weird groups, he argues Meanwhile in non-Weird groups, he argues there may be a social interdependence where people's survival, identity and security depend on health and prosperity of 'kin based' network."
W.E.I.R.D: Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic.
I want to thank you for your work in studying western society. It seems everyone is too afraid today to articulate as skillfully as you have the great aspects of western culture for fear of backlash for not also mentioning its flaws, or perhaps some have been deeply socialized to think of sensitivity to all people as an end in and of itself rather than a tool for us to cooperate. Your work has brought me to a new level of understanding that none of the readings I've been assigned or professors at Tulane have; and I consider my education there thus far to be great.
So according to you, how did Near-Eastern civilizations solve this problem? What about the Greco-Romans?
Post a Comment