Unseen wrote:

@ Simon and Robert One can belong to various groups almost without limit and often with incompatible or conflicting interests. One might work for Willie’s Widgets and own Willie’s Widget’s stock as a retirement investment. So, joining in a strike for higher wages for oneself and one’s fellow union members (yet another group) could a…

[Read more]

Since there’s no way to get rid of groups, since only groups can cooperate (internally) – there’s no way, in this competitive world, to get rid of in-group bias and out-group antipathy.  The only thing we can do is be aware of it and how it works, and then maybe it can be overcome to some extent.

A group that evolve dynamically and for the benefi…[Read more]

@ Simon and Robert

One can belong to various groups almost without limit and often with incompatible or conflicting interests. One might work for Willie’s Widgets and own Willie’s Widget’s stock as a retirement investment. So, joining in a strike for higher wages for oneself and one’s fellow union members (yet another group) could adversely…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:

Unseen wrote:

Set being a useful term because a mathematical set can have just one member—or even no members, a null set.

That’s the difference. A collaborative group must have at least two members (a partnership, team, etc.).

Okay, but I asked a question which wasn’t I guess, worth answering when one might split lin…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

Favoring those within one’s own group lead to more cohesive and cooperative units, enhancing group survival against external threats. It allowed us to protect our territory and resources and build up trust between members as we watched out for each other. This trust relationship is likely where our ethical behavior a…

[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

What is the logic of in-group bias? When the most basic group (in mathematical terms, a set*) is the self, it’s hard to distinguish it from simple narcissism. Expand the set to one’s group (however defined, which is a problem: family? neighborhood? village? territory? nation-state? humankind?) and you have to decide to what ext…

[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

Set being a useful term because a mathematical set can have just one member—or even no members, a null set.

That’s the difference.  A collaborative group must have at least two members (a partnership, team, etc.).

What is the logic of in-group bias? When the most basic group (in mathematical terms, a set*) is the self, it’s hard to distinguish it from simple narcissism.

Expand the set to one’s group (however defined, which is a problem: family? neighborhood? village? territory? nation-state? humankind?) and you have to decide to what extent do you have to…[Read more]