turns out that my snap judgment about g*me~B was wrong. it's actually a lot worse than i thought
Show this thread
-
... it's factually wrong small tribes have long histories of trade and war with each other, way before agriculture showed up. ingroup x outgroup is so deeply ingrained into our psyche the idea that there ever was a tribe like that is simply ridiculous
Um yes this paragraph says bonds are strong within the group but if a tribe meets another group they fight... (or move on)
-
-
they're different paragraphs a 150 persons tribe is an inbred tribe lines between cooperation and conflict are not clear-cut i really don't feel like listing all the ways in which this coherence/conflict, defection/loyalty dichotomy misses key aspects of human socialization
-
That’s ok. 150 is mentioned because it’s the Dunbar number. I’d be curious to hear about harder evidence that tribes were actually much bigger than this.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.