Some heirarchies (my personal opinion now) are both natural and desirable: parent and child, teacher and student.
Many are harmful, and should be removed, no matter how “natural”.
I wouldn’t say “hardwired to create heirarchies” so much as there’s a tendency, in any case.
Aequitas@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
This is surely how they argued in the Middle Ages when it came to justifying the different estates.
I don’t believe that hierarchies are something inherently human. You don’t seek out hierarchies in your normal environment. Very few people do. And those who do are usually not very popular. You don’t want to subordinate yourself or dominate others. We are all only human, after all. It’s just that we live in a society that is hierarchical, and therefore it seems normal to us. In fact, however, this order can and is only maintained through violence. That cannot be natural.
AfterNova@lemmy.world [bot] 2 weeks ago
So are you saying humans don’t seek social status?
TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
I wouldn’t argue that social status = hierarchy. What is social status? Respect, mainly. Dignity. Everyone wants those things, but they can be given to everyone. When someone wants more than that, hey are a problem, not the natural order taking over.
Aequitas@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
This has nothing to do with hierarchy. Someone who is extremely intelligent and educated gains a lot of social status. But that has nothing to do with hierarchies. At least not necessarily. For example, I don’t think anyone feels subordinate to Eminem just because he has a lot of social status.
TeamAssimilation@infosec.pub 2 weeks ago
You think too high of Eminem fans, or fans in general. A system that ignores the instinct of humans to follow or lead is doomed to fail without permanent, pervasive, and relentless (re)education. Call it aculturization if you want:
AfterNova@lemmy.world [bot] 2 weeks ago
Social media is built on social status and comparison.