Thread by @anielsen108

1/ Four hierarchical laws of social desire

First Law: In-group/Out-group

Defend my in-group, attack our out-group.

2/ Four hierarchical laws of social desire

Second Law: Move up in status (within my in-group)

Orient towards what maintains and increases status relative to peers. Be open to opportunities for sudden leaps in status, but focus the day-to-day on gradual increases.

3/ Four hierarchical laws of social desire

Third law: Fit in with my peers

Where there do not appear to be opportunities to increase status within my in-group, focus on fitting in with my peer group.

4/ Four hierarchical laws of social desire

Fourth law: Differentiate within peer group (while fitting in)

Maximize my unique aspects to the extent possible while still fitting in with my peers.

5/ Summary of the four hierarchical laws of social desire:

1) Defend my in-group, attack our out-group
2) Move up in status in my in-group
3) Fit in
4) Differentiate

6/ Taking a random sub-culture as an example:

1) Punk Rockers are better than corporate folks
2) I'm going to play in a Punk Rock band. That's the coolest.
3) You like my Mohawk?
4) Yeah, but I got a unique twist: I dye only the tips red.

7/ Again, with exegesis

1) Punk Rockers = in-group; corporate folks = out-group
2) Playing in a punk band is higher status within punk community
3) Having a Mohawk signifies "one of the tribe", and fitting-in
4) Coloring my Mohawk differently makes gives me a unique twist

8/ Again, as biological purpose

1) Defend in-group, attack out-group = defend survival resources
2) Move up in status = improve mating potential
3) Fit in = define whom to reciprocally share resources with
4) Differentiate = optimize group capabilities through diversity

9/ These four fundamental and hierarchical laws of human social desire can explain at least 50% of aggregate social behavior.

They are also hard-wired very deeply in the brain, and so they can no more be overcome via knowledge of them than optical illusions can be overcome.

10/ Political movements and institutions that attempt to eliminate these laws of human social desire invariably manifest them with the institutional creators as the new beneficiaries. See: history of successful socialist/communist revolutions.

11/ On the hopeful side, though,

Reducing in-group vs. out-group conflict: although eliminating the out-group is not possible, we can have large in-groups relative to the out-group.

12/ Reducing competition for high-status: multiple subcultures allow multiple status hierarchies, creating more available high status. This, though, probably at best spreads high status around to 10% of people, instead of 1%.

13/ Reducing pressure to fit in: cultural artifacts can reduce the requirements to fit in, from, say, having to have the correct speech patterns and clothing to something far more mushy and abstract, such as liking a particular TV show.

14/ Increasing the capability to differentiate while still fitting in: capitalism provides endless products that give capability to differentiate while still fitting in.

15/ In the end, what work can seeing with the lens of human social desire do?

* It can reduce bondage to one's own social desire, but only by a very small amount.
* It can predict patterns of human behavior, as a complement to thinking in incentives.
* Useful for making money

16/ And so, here we are: inescapably driven by social desires that will never resolve to perfect satisfaction.

Do not treat this as a problem to solve; the cure is inevitably worse than the disease.

Freedom lies in neither inflaming these desires nor trying to stamp them out.