the evolving mind

And leveling the human hierarchy is a continuous struggle for the simple reason that we are born to strive for status.
- Frans de Waal (19)

Rather than in terms of personal power and position in a hierarchy, humans frequently focus on and speak about status. What is the difference? Is there one?

In his study, “Dominance Hierarchies in Groups of Early Adolescents,” Savin-Williams explains that “status is defined by reference to a group dominance hierarchy.”(20) But isn’t this circular reasoning? No, for we can make a distinction. Status can be viewed as a less directly confrontational (i.e., a more “civilized”) form of persuasion. To persuade someone is to move them, so there is power in persuasion. And once again, we can’t forget that dominance and status are acquired AND granted. In many situations humans appear eager to elevate individuals above themselves.

While we frequently envision muscular power as the key component to hierarchical behavior, in more refined forms one’s position in a social group – one’s rank – can be determined by such things as “personal attributes, personality, skills, knowledge, wisdom and so on.”(21) The signs of status consist of not personal size but the size of one’s house, the size of one’s paycheck, the size of one’s audience.

In his book, Collision of Wills: How Ambiguity About Social Rank Breeds Conflict, Gould explains that human-on-human lethal attacks are frequently conducted by youths motivated by honor or pride. They had been disrespected and struck back violently. (22) To protect your honor means to defend your “good standing” in a social group. In a culture of honor we plainly discern the overlap between hierarchies based upon physical persuasion and those consisting of social and skill-set persuasion. Gould reminds us that many of the signs of status (metaphorical dominance?) – sitting on an elevated platform or at the focal point of a table, living on the top of a hill versus down in the valley, etc. – are nearly universal.(23) I suspect that they developed directly out of the more elemental instincts of physical power, persuasion, and positioning.

In their research into aggression, Carlson, Marcus-Newhall, and Miller found that situations cues including “the low social status of the target” strongly influenced aggressive behavior.(24) Chimps, too, are known to pick on those they perceive as weaker.(25) In the case of chimps the weakness consists of a lack of physical abilities and social alliances. In humans, the weakness of low status can manifest in forms as varied as the cultures and sub-cultures people operate within.

Lurking behind status we find a primate instinctively inclined to create social hierarchies. Rather than sub- (below) natural, the realm of gods is referred to as supernatural. It is above us. And there is a reason for this positioning.

—

(19) de Waal, F. Our Inner Ape: A Leading Primatologist Explains Why We Are Who We Are, New York, Riverhead Books, 2005. p. 79
(20) Savin-Willians, R.C., “Dominance Hierarchies in Groups of Early Adolescents,” Child Development, Dec. 1979, p.923
(21) Power, M. The Egalitarians: Human and Chimpanzee, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991. p. 47
(22) Gould, R. V., Collision of Wills: How Ambiguity About Social Rank Breeds Conflict, University of Chicago, Chicago, 2003. p.7
(23) Gould, 2003, p. 11
(24) Carlson, M., Marcus?Newhall, A., & Miller, N. “Effects of situational aggression cues: A quantitative review.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1990, 58(4),
p.630
(25) de Waal, F. 2005, p.29

[July hiatus automated re-post. First appeared here: http://almightyalpha.blogspot.com/2007/09/status-power-of-civilized.html]

Technorati Links: evolution, psychology, status

Trackback URI | Comments RSS