By this I mean, organize around some single person for leadership, or in other contexts focus on a popular figure. Even societies that tend to be described as more collectively-organized/oriented tend to do this.

People are people and are as flawed as one another, so this pervasive tendency to elevate others is odd to me. It can be fun and goofy as a game, but as a more serious organizing or focal principle, it just seems extremely fragile and prone to failure (e.g. numerous groups falling into disarray at the loss of a leader/leader & their family, corruption via nepotism and the like, etc.).

  • blackbrook
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Asking why like this has the implicit flawed premise that human behaviors like this are products of conscious thought. They are not. (I don’t mean this as a criticism of you particularly, it is inherent in our culture to look at everything humans do as if it were rational and conscious, despite the reality that so much is it is not.)

    I’d answer this by saying it is human nature. Most people don’t think about it and are not aware they are doing it. Many might even deny it. This is not to say individuals can’t stop and reflect and be conscious and rational about. Some do but most don’t.

    • fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Asking why like this has the implicit flawed premise that human behaviors like this are products of conscious thought.

      This is not generally a flaw. We can ask “why?” questions about lots of natural processes that don’t involve conscious thought. For example, a lot of plant growth follows mathematical patterns; the “why?” is that this optimizes the use of space or of sunlight, so it’s favored by evolution.

      • blackbrook
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh I agree with you. I didn’t mean asking why was flawed, but specifically asking why with the implicit assumptions we tend to carry about human actions being rational and conscious. I agree that asking “why is this a part of human nature?” is a good question.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d answer this by saying it is human nature.

      I follow where you’re coming from, however I’m quoting this little part as I always find arguments to “nature” suspect, especially regarding conscious entities which complicate this observation/thinking. You can probably guess where I’m going with this, that being, “Well, what is human nature?” which as you say isn’t a criticism/dig at you, it’s more of a personal quibble with the “nature” line of thinking.

      Nevertheless, I lean towards agreeing with you in the sense that it may be more related to an unreflective/unconscious social predisposition of humans specifically (possibly other social species as well in their own forms).

      • blackbrook
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well “it’s human nature” can indeed be a cop out. It shouldn’t be a discussion ender. And it shouldn’t be a justification. Murder is a part of human nature too. However it is a reality to be worked with. And one can ask, in what conditions is this behavior brought out, and in what conditions discouraged?

    • centof@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’d answer this by saying it is human nature.

      I would actually disagree with that statement to some degree. I think it is largely learned behavior to follow in the context of modern society. We spend 15+ years of our life having to follow authority in some way via the school system and that conditions us to follow more than lead on a society wide scale.

      There is certainly an element of nature too via mirroring. Mirroring is when people subconsciously imitates the gestures and body language of another person to help build trust. However, I believe that our cultures way of nurturing obedience via its institutions is a bigger factor in how we treat leaders.