Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-07-2017, 02:20 PM
Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
Dr. Robert Sapolsky on Hierarchy and Stress

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4UMyTnlaMY


I found this video to be very interesting. As a former Pentecostal Christian it seemed to counter the alpha male Christian leadership I watched abuse and control so many. Having been raised as a Nice Guy Syndrome Christian I always found it puzzling how histrionic or narcissistic people excelled at ministry and wooed large crowds whereas kinder, gentler leader and servant types were left in the dust.

But, Alpha/Omega hierarchy is so common I am wondering what the alternative would be. And I am wondering if challenging the Alpha/Omega hierarchy is going against evolution, or a way we are evolving further.

Thanks.

Here is the thing about potential...You either use your gift or your gift uses you. You are either a rocket or a bomb.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2017, 03:44 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
(04-07-2017 02:20 PM)Oaken Wrote:  But, Alpha/Omega hierarchy is so common I am wondering what the alternative would be.

Egalitarianism.

(04-07-2017 02:20 PM)Oaken Wrote:  And I am wondering if challenging the Alpha/Omega hierarchy is going against evolution, or a way we are evolving further.

Evolution is moot at this point. We have the technology to genetically engineer our species anyway we want bypassing the inefficient mechanisms of evolution. We should choose carefully.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
04-07-2017, 04:29 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
The first time I learned about his research it made a huge impression on me.

In all walks of life people seem to think we need leaders. I'm not a follower or a leader. I reject the idea that we need leaders. It's frustrating that we're stuck in this archaic paradigm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I'mFred's post
04-07-2017, 04:51 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
(04-07-2017 04:29 PM)ImFred Wrote:  The first time I learned about his research it made a huge impression on me.

In all walks of life people seem to think we need leaders. I'm not a follower or a leader. I reject the idea that we need leaders. It's frustrating that we're stuck in this archaic paradigm.

In 55 years, I have seen nothing to convince me that there is anybody who is not just as fucking lost as me.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
04-07-2017, 05:00 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
I want to beat the living fuck out the next person I hear use the word 'leadership'
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2017, 06:21 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
I was going to post some pics or links about Christian "Leadership" hahaha (don't beat the fuck out of me) but, I am still new and don't know the rules about posting memes or pics or slideshow pics from other sites. I did grit my teeth at a site where it proudly declared, "21 Irrefutable Reasons Why Jesus Christ is the Greatest Leader of All Time". I was not convinced.

I do see problems with humans controlling or lording over people. The hippie part of me wants to live in a global community. However, a different part of me has become jaded by seeing toxic hierarchy and cliques rise up in even the most communal settings. But, at least civil rights were not denied, nor lives destroyed. I'm all for a community way of living. If it could really be just that. I just know that even groups like Rainbow Gathering lament the growing number of "drainbows" who take and take and take but don't give.

I wonder then, when the time comes for humans to populate Mars or some other place, I wonder just what system will be put in place. And I wonder if part of me is revealing right there that I myself have strong views about hierarchy and inner demands for place and order. I wonder.

Here is the thing about potential...You either use your gift or your gift uses you. You are either a rocket or a bomb.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2017, 08:59 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
(04-07-2017 05:00 PM)ImFred Wrote:  I want to beat the living fuck out the next person I hear use the word 'leadership'

I'll risk it.

(04-07-2017 04:29 PM)ImFred Wrote:  ...
In all walks of life people seem to think we need leaders. I'm not a follower or a leader. I reject the idea that we need leaders. It's frustrating that we're stuck in this archaic paradigm.

How about thought-leadership in e.g. philosophy, science and technology?

But I'm with you regarding political leaders (as icons) or advertising leadership (persuasion)... I don't follow easily, either.

Have a ponder on this...
Leadership used to be direct, one-to-one and it related to information transfer e.g. parent-child, master-slave, guru-acolyte, Athenian-style direct democracy etc.
Post-printing press we got one-to-many leadership, e.g. political rallies, class-room education for the industrial age, advertising billboards/TV etc.
And also, in some areas, came many-to-one communication where leaders became responsive to and accountable to their followers e.g. representative democracy, trade unions, consumer-demand.

Now, in the internet age, communication is becoming many-to-many. How will the role of leader be re-shaped? Is it even necessary?

So, are we stuck or we just taking a little time to adjust to the new paradigm?

@Oaken,

I heard about that baboon troop a while back... it made me wonder about testosterone levels in politics and economics (I'm thinking about the nasty little shits I used to know from the City of London). But I confess I hadn't thought about it in a churchy context... probably because the Church of England has long been domesticated.

What will those churches look like once everyone has had a chance to see other religions (every day on the youtubes), still want to belong to 'something', still want believe in belief etc.? Probably something like the UUs

So how to get there?

I guess we could arrange for all the aggressive fucks to get TB but that's a little draconian.

Note how new members of the troop (immigrants?) changed their behaviour in order to assimilate. The trick is in sexual selection and who holds the power there? The ladies.

The answer would be for aggression to become unattractive.
Perhaps there should be a 'sexual selection down-vote' meme.
If you were serious, you could even create a few million 'female' social media accounts who actively seek out the aggressors online to point out how they're not likely to pass on their genes anytime soon.

Just a thought.

Consider

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
04-07-2017, 11:16 PM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
I am SO glad I joined this site. Thanks for the replies. Finally some thinking people to talk to.

Here is the thing about potential...You either use your gift or your gift uses you. You are either a rocket or a bomb.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 04:25 AM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
(04-07-2017 08:59 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Have a ponder on this...
Leadership used to be direct, one-to-one and it related to information transfer e.g. parent-child, master-slave, guru-acolyte, Athenian-style direct democracy etc.
Post-printing press we got one-to-many leadership, e.g. political rallies, class-room education for the industrial age, advertising billboards/TV etc.
And also, in some areas, came many-to-one communication where leaders became responsive to and accountable to their followers e.g. representative democracy, trade unions, consumer-demand.

Now, in the internet age, communication is becoming many-to-many. How will the role of leader be re-shaped? Is it even necessary?

So, are we stuck or we just taking a little time to adjust to the new paradigm?

Think we'll need someone ultimately responsible for making decisions we can blame for a little while longer at least. I suggest we continue to call them "leaders" instead of "bagholders" so Moms doesn't catch on.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
05-07-2017, 04:44 AM
RE: Sapolsky: Hierarchy and Stress
(05-07-2017 04:25 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(04-07-2017 08:59 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Have a ponder on this...
Leadership used to be direct, one-to-one and it related to information transfer e.g. parent-child, master-slave, guru-acolyte, Athenian-style direct democracy etc.
Post-printing press we got one-to-many leadership, e.g. political rallies, class-room education for the industrial age, advertising billboards/TV etc.
And also, in some areas, came many-to-one communication where leaders became responsive to and accountable to their followers e.g. representative democracy, trade unions, consumer-demand.

Now, in the internet age, communication is becoming many-to-many. How will the role of leader be re-shaped? Is it even necessary?

So, are we stuck or we just taking a little time to adjust to the new paradigm?

Think we'll need someone ultimately responsible for making decisions we can blame for a little while longer at least. I suggest we continue to call them "leaders" instead of "bagholders" so Moms doesn't catch on.

I PM'd you the secret handshake.

Yes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: