Monkeysphere

[Fractalbeard]

http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

In a nutshell, the idea is that we may be limited in the number of humans we are able consider to be "people", in a sense. The article elaborates on this as a possible explanation of why we have double standards when dealing with people outside of this limited group, or monkeysphere.

[the last yatto]

[Requia ☣]

Heinlein talked about this, i think in Starship Troopers.  He pushed the idea that the kewey to ethics isn't the what, but the who, and that a 'good' world view extends the tribe out to the whole of humanity.

[the last yatto]

cracked is a virus, that i cant stop clicking
http://www.cracked.com/article_17479_5-corporate-promotions-that-ended-in-predictable-disaster.html

[Triple Zero]

I'm familiar with the idea, it's pretty good and very catchy. There were a few things wrong with it, however.

(and that doesnt mean the concept is completely useless btw)

first off, does anyone have the actual paper or data on correlation between brain size and tribe size in primates? I wonder how many data points they got and what the graph looks like.

second, and I'm trying to wringe my brain for remembering where I read this, but the problem is, there isn't really any practical realworld data that actually shows there is an actual cut-off point or change in slope or something measurable in social dynamics that happens around groups of 150 people.

I got this from the comments in some article I read, where the author was proposing changes in social dynamics at 2,3,5, 15, 50, .., 150 or something like that. I think he cited numbers from the army such as platoon-size and other hierarchical sizes in the army.

but the point that some clever commenter made, then, came down to the idea that these "boundaries" are chosen pretty arbitrarily, there are no real cutoff points, and not only because they would be different for every individual, but even the base idea that changes in social dynamics do not change smoothly with group sizes, is not only unproven, but probably false.

(except of course for differences between groups of 2/3/4/5 people, but that's based on person-to-person interactions, different domain)

[Elder Iptuous]

Tripzip....
that reminds me about one of Cain's posts regarding the sizes of insurgent groups and the differences in how they are mangaged/behave, which i would think to be based pretty heavily on actuals observed rather than some unsubstantiated theory....
just thinking....

[Brotep]

My mind definitely wasn't blown, but the basic point is true--misfortune within our circle of friends is lamented, while the death of thousands on the other side of the world due to some natural disaster is our entertainment, on the evening news.

Anyway, I'm with 000 on this.  Not enough backup for the claims.  And brain size?  Not even surface area?  Bah.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

In a nutshell, the idea is that we may be limited in the number of humans we are able consider to be "people", in a sense. The article elaborates on this as a possible explanation of why we have double standards when dealing with people outside of this limited group, or monkeysphere.

Cock and repost, but GOOD cock and repost.