Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Overcoming Us vs. Them

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 249 posts

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#11

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

rhcom2 wrote: post #4
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #2

I think this is going to be the next big challenge in social tech: Contact: The consequences of growing up amid diversity just discussed bring us to the effects of prolonged contact on Us/Theming. In the 1950s the psychologist Gordon Allport proposed “contact theory.” Inaccurate version: bring Us-es and Thems together (say, teenagers from two hostile nations in a summer camp), animosities disappear, similarities star…

It kind of assumes good faith actors too doesn't it? One person participating in bad faith just to jerk around the "Thems" would worsen things.

Yes, although I like the idea of superordinate goals because I think it eliminates a lot of attempts at bad faith participation. Republicans and Democrats can be aware of their differing views and meet together and get along and chat about their families and maybe a policy decision if they're meeting at church or to play recreational kickball or whatever, if you put those same people together in line at the polling station you'd get a very different result. Maybe the problem is that we have a tendency to only discuss our differences under the worst possible circumstances. But how do you overcome that? I'm not sure, this article gave me a lot to think about.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#12

Post by nine_k »

onewhonknocks wrote: post #7

Unpopular opinion - Is this something that we should seek to overcome entirely? These judgement calls are hard-wired into us for a reason. Whilst there are scenarios in which it is bad, there are scenarios in which it is good.

We can overcome them without removing them, by extending "us" widely enough. This is how a number of religions handled it, leading to their expansion over large swaths of diverse nations.

Seeing most everyone on Earth as ingroup improves collaboration and thus propels culture / prosperity.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#13

Post by maxerickson »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #2

I think this is going to be the next big challenge in social tech: Contact: The consequences of growing up amid diversity just discussed bring us to the effects of prolonged contact on Us/Theming. In the 1950s the psychologist Gordon Allport proposed “contact theory.” Inaccurate version: bring Us-es and Thems together (say, teenagers from two hostile nations in a summer camp), animosities disappear, similarities star…

Is it obviously a technology problem?

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#14

Post by yoran »

I think this phenomenon is the fundamental problem of any two-party system and is one of the issues in American politics. The "us vs them" feeling is a lot less strong when there are multiple parties. This feeling leads to more divisiveness in politics and eventually trickles down to the whole population.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#15

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

legitster wrote: post #8

This is where countries with some sort of mandatory service may have us beat. And maybe it explains why American policy was so focused after the big national wars. I don't think there's a better way to force camaraderie. But then it becomes Us vs Them on the other side of the border.

>But then it becomes Us vs Them on the other side of the border.

Yeah, maybe that's better on the other side than inside though. Like if President Trump started a huge "Beat China" campaign all about making sure America stays the world hegemon, that could bring a lot of neighbors together even if it widens the gulf between me and someone on the other side of the world. It's hard to say.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#16

Post by bllguo »

onewhonknocks wrote: post #7

Unpopular opinion - Is this something that we should seek to overcome entirely? These judgement calls are hard-wired into us for a reason. Whilst there are scenarios in which it is bad, there are scenarios in which it is good.

I'm drawing a blank. When is it good nowadays?

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#17

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

maxerickson wrote: post #13
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #2

I think this is going to be the next big challenge in social tech: Contact: The consequences of growing up amid diversity just discussed bring us to the effects of prolonged contact on Us/Theming. In the 1950s the psychologist Gordon Allport proposed “contact theory.” Inaccurate version: bring Us-es and Thems together (say, teenagers from two hostile nations in a summer camp), animosities disappear, similarities star…

Is it obviously a technology problem?

I'd say technology is a contributing factor but obviously not the only one.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#18

Post by jpfed »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #11
rhcom2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of assumes good faith actors too doesn't it? One person participating in bad faith just to jerk around the "Thems" would worsen things.

Yes, although I like the idea of superordinate goals because I think it eliminates a lot of attempts at bad faith participation. Republicans and Democrats can be aware of their differing views and meet together and get along and chat about their families and maybe a policy decision if they're meeting at church or to play recreational kickball or whatever, if you put those same people together in line at the polling s…

(One incredibly minor detail that emerged during the Scalise shooting incident is that Congressional Democrats and Republicans play baseball together... but each party gets its own team. A better way to overcome division would have been to have teams composed of a mix of parties)

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#19

Post by thomastjeffery »

onewhonknocks wrote: post #7

Unpopular opinion - Is this something that we should seek to overcome entirely? These judgement calls are hard-wired into us for a reason. Whilst there are scenarios in which it is bad, there are scenarios in which it is good.

I can't think of any examples in which it is good.

I also think that is a mischaracterization of the problem, and of the solution.

Our instinct is to trust those in our communities, and distrust those outside our communities.

While that was useful in the past, two significant things have changed:

1. We are in a civilized society where it is to our advantage to begin relationships with trust rather than distrust.

2. We are not in separate communities fighting over basic resources, but in a large community where smaller parts work together.

These changes mean that the problem stems from us not trusting each other, and fragmenting the larger community.

The solution is for us to realize our limitations, and overcome them, by trusting those with whom we are unfamiliar, and working together as a larger community.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#20

Post by laretluval »

nine_k wrote: post #12
onewhonknocks wrote: post #7

Unpopular opinion - Is this something that we should seek to overcome entirely? These judgement calls are hard-wired into us for a reason. Whilst there are scenarios in which it is bad, there are scenarios in which it is good.

We can overcome them without removing them, by extending "us" widely enough. This is how a number of religions handled it, leading to their expansion over large swaths of diverse nations. Seeing most everyone on Earth as ingroup improves collaboration and thus propels culture / prosperity.

But what if there is a group whose strategy is to take advantage of the trusting nature of everyone else for its own gains? In that case it would be advantageous to unite against them. Universal cooperation and trust is great when there are no attackers but it needs to be hardened against attacks somehow.

Also, does universal collaboration necessarily bring the best results? Seems like there might be a number of people over which universal coordination becomes infeasible.

Post reply on HN