and what point are you trying to prove with that?

the study is basically let's put these participants under x defined conditions and see what their brain activity looks like. using fMRI you can correlate certain kinds of brain activity with probably any particular behavior

I already had this discussion with @Synopsis a month ago: ktt2.com/socialism-thread-702/64

I have to go to work now, we can continue later if you want.

Then why do they exist in every single life form that’s ever existed on this planet?

i remember seeing this, and no i don't want to waste my time because I think you misunderstand social psychology and Sapolsky's work on psychoneuroendocrinology

really? every single life form that's ever existed on this planet?

their propensity for asserting s*** without evidence is really quite the talent lol. like, all these studies i'm reading don't say s*** about inherent nature but more about how we perceive status or whatever. to draw the conclusion from that, that hierarchies are natural and or necessary is wild to me.

not to mention luxurywhip just deadass lurking this thread begging someone to reply to him

Help me understand then

like if y'all want to have a thread dedicated to whatever weird ideology you subscribe to go make it. idk why y'all wanna argue human nature or whatever so badly

I'm not a big fan of hers or anything, and I'm not big on radical celebrities but she has been doing the reading and questioning her own politics along the way. Can't hate on that.

I expect to see her reading some Bakunin at some point in the near future.

yah i dont think ive ever even heard a song by her lol but at least she seems genuine in her learning and growth.

Every life form that has some semblance of sentience and organises itself into groups/packs, yes

I really hate the low IQ of this website.

I always assume people have already read something or understand something already when they post with this attitude as if they do.

I'm revamping the OP anyway to be more explanatory with less links because people are really ignorant on Anarchism

Anarchy Works literally disproves half the s*** y'all both are talking about.

i don't really care bro. adjust your frame of thinking; that's all i have to say. i couldn't care less where you fall on the political spectrum, just stop falsely equivocating and b******izing the good work that has nothing to do with what you want it to mean.

this is what irks me the most. like they constantly make the most simplistic arguments that have been debunked over and over, but they pretend they are the first people to ever make such assertions but have never engaged with any literature that might run contrary to their beliefs. i dont think people need to be scholars or anything to have a discussion, but if youre going to be posting about this s*** it would be helpful to know that they at least had some sort of theory to fall back on

Bro, I could apply every word of this paragraph to you

You think your some sort of super intelligent being that is smarter that everyone else, it’s sad

i will make the thread for you and like minded individuals to discuss and share your big brain ideas. what do you want it to be called?

i dont want a thread lol

do you want every thread on here to be an echo chamber?

So all artificially created hierarchiea are justified because social hierarchy is also a natural phenomenon?

Look at Bezos my guy, like just look at him, you think he would be high up the social hierarchy if humans were living in the wild?

The current social hierarchies that we see are highly unnatural, humans have moved past that kind of hierarchy that can be justified by these kinds of arguments, we don't live in the same world that lobsters do. By your logic feudal hierarchies are totally justifiable as well.

Also these studies don't even say anything about social status itself, but about its impact and how it's perceived, so I don't really get how it would be relevant to that argument anyway.

ok i dont see how group organization is some how a whammy against anarchism (or socialism) but bears are sentient creatures that are primarily solitary. and tigers. and octopuses.

we are social creatures

do you have an example of a social animal that doesnt organise within a hierarchical structure?

as long as there are differences between individual beings in a social species, a hierarchy of some sort inevitably manifests

whether it's a hierarchy based on strength, beauty, competence, utility, whatever. human beings will envitably categorise themselves based on a quality or trait that is of value in the world they live in. in a socialist society this is artificially stopped, but in order to regulate a socialist society it still requires a government which is a hierarchy within itself. there is simply no other way for human beings to function together in a way that is efficient by any stretch of the imagination

the minute hierarchy exists, socialism/anarchy are both rendered failures by definition. because wouldn't true anarchy and true socialism require a total lack of hierarchy?

anarchy is an especially ed idea, can anyone explain to me why it wouldnt give rise to roving bands of warlords trying to place themselves within a power hierarchy? history has proven that that is exactly how human beings operate in such conditions

unless by anarchy you mean some other abstract meaning of the word

I'm not justifying anything. I'm saying that hierarchies are unavoidable and that the likelihood of better ones emerging after you get rid of the current ones is minimal, so be careful when advocating for a revolution.

jfc you don't see the irony in you saying that out of all people?

Sure I'll be careful thanks for the heads up

oh almighty 145+ IQ anarchist, educate me pls