Us and Them: Understanding Your Tribal Mind

Let me begin by stating the obvious: David Berreby is a journalist. This is both good and bad for him. It is good because first and foremost he is a writer; which simply means that he knows how to write well, keep pace, extract the useful information and boil down the discussion because he has no "horse in the race." But, this leads to the bad; he is not an authority on the subject. Now, as someone who understands what an "appeal to authority" is, this doesn't pose a problem. With that aside, I think this a terrific book. I read it about ten months ago and didn't think it was all that great; however, I re-skimmed it and began to realize just how useful it is. Berreby begins in earnest with a discussion of what exactly a tribe of people, or "human-kind" is and how the concept has been used in the past. Notable mentions go to David Hume, Sir Francis Galton and Ludwig Wittgenstein; their names pop-up continuously throughout the book. The general point of the book is to demonstrate that "tribes" are a construct, or belief, that rely heavily on folk-psychology with effects that range from pointless to extremely harmful. For example, and in reference to homosexuals, let me quote Berreby, "As I've mentioned, human kinds are real in just the way that money is real. If enough people believe in a kind of person, that kind will take its place among the realities of life. Yes, it's a mental process, not ultimate reality, that makes us believe nowadays that gay people are a human kind with a common outlook and culture, while left-handers are not." The same argument is made for race, nationality and ethnicity, amongst others. The point Berreby is making here is that belief creates reality (too a certain extent), not the otherway around. The debate is between Essentialist's and Anti-essentialist's. The next major issue is centered around a kind of Mind/ Body and Nature/ Nurture discussion. Those mentioned are big names like Steven Pinker, V.S. Ramachandran, Antonio Damasio, Marvin Minsky, Jerry Fodor, David Rosenhan, Temple Grandin, Oliver Sacks and Simon Baron-Cohen, to name of a few. I think it is in this discussion that Berreby does a very fine job of defining the Mind/ Body and Nature/ Nurture issue. The last major issue is centered around the modern 'Levels of Selection' problem (although Berreby doesn't call it this) in relation to evolution. Some big names mentioned in this discussion are Stephen Jay Gould, David Sloan Wilson, Ernst Mayr, Richard Lewontin and John Tooby set against neo-Darwinians like E.O. Wilson, Robert Wright, Richard Dawkins, along with "race-realists" like Vincent Sarich, Frank Miele (Race: The Reality of Human Differences) and J. Philippe Rushton (Race, Evolution, and Behavior : A Life History Perspective (2nd Special Abridged Edition)). Here again, Berreby does an excellent job defining the issues. Here is one last quote that concludes the book: "The moral of the story, I think, is simple: the code is in your head, where you ma

"Us and Them" by David Berreby explores the human faculty for seeing other people as members of groups with group characteristics, or as Berreby calls them, Human Kinds. The book examines classic results of social psychology, such as Sharif's Robber's Cave experiment and Tajfel's arbitrary groups. He tries to present the current evidence for the faculty being an unconscious module in the mind that automatically places people in groups and attaches group qualities to Them. The book is well written and has many vivid examples of how people stereotype and why those stereotypes are not reliable guides for rational human behavior. Although he occasionally dives into brain architecture and evolutionary theory, it is not too overwhelming for the intelligent lay reader (that all important Human Kind). The topic is very important, considering that issues of race, gender, religious conflict, and injustice based on economic class dominate our political scene. This book helps the reader get a better scientific footing on the psychological basis of those issues. By exploring how our human minds--and by extension our brains--process group identity, the author is in an area that has been popular lately due in part to Steven Pinker's "How the Mind Works." This research area is called the modular theory of the mind, pioneered by people such as Jerry Fodor and Noam Chomsky. However, Berreby is wary of Pinker's complete programme. He explicitly criticizes Pinker. Never in this book does Berreby refer to a brain "module." Instead, he refers to the mind's code for processing human kind thinking, called kind-sight. To this reader, it amounts to the same thing. A module is a module. Berreby does make the point at length that there is no single chunk of brain that does all human kind code processing. (But, then, I don't think Pinker ever claimed that, either.) Berreby does show that the human kind code is automatic, unconscious, and hardwired into the developing brain. This to me qualifies his theory as in the tradition of the modular theory of the mind. Berreby also holds evolutionary theory at arm's length. He is wary of strict reductionism from social structures to selfish genes. He seems uncomfortable with Williams and Dawkins and their insistence that the selfish gene is the final arbiter of evolution. He shows that some of the assumptions of this camp are inseparable from the assumptions of "race realists" such as Rushton. This wariness leads to an excellent exploration of the nature of science and "levels of analysis." He describes the "selfish gene" camp and the "plurality of mechanisms" camp as two competing social groups that use stereotypes and intergroup hostility as part of their own human kind thinking. Clearly, he doesn't want to be a blind follower of either camp. Nevertheless, it is obvious that he does consider the faculty for kind-sight to be an evolved and distinct mental structure. To that extent, he is, whether he admits it or not, an Evol

"Prejudice", we are told, isn't "reasonable". "Race" is an "illogical" or "unscientific" concept. Christians tell us we must "love all others as our brothers" - and sisters in a more ecumenical world. Yet Chief Executives can label entire nations as elements of an "Axis of Evil" and make or threaten war with impunity. And masses of the population support them. Why should this be so? David Berreby sought out philosophers, psychologists and other scholars in an extensive quest for some answers. He found a good many and recounts them in this nearly exhaustive study. In a well organised and captivating account, he weaves together many threads in building a picture of how we view ourselves and others. Biology tells us that our DNA makes us one with our fellows. Yet, somewhere between conception and our ability to distinguish ourselves from others, we begin to categorise those "others". We may find them acceptable, and join their company. In other cases, we deem the differences unacceptable. "Us" and "Them" become the basis for value judgements. Berreby recognises that the distinctions are in our minds. He asks how they come to be there in the first place. He examines the various forms of prejudice, both positive and negative, in tracing both their histories and manifestations. Heart disease, for example, was once considered more prevalent among the rich and powerful. Now, studies show that those carrying burdens of pressures from "above" feel more stressed. Hence, their bodies react and heart problems follow. Classes of people, often the poor and ill-considered such as the "cagot" peasants in France, were despised and relegated to menial roles in society. Over time, the classification fell into disuse. In Berreby's words, they were "recategorised". The author traces the mental patterns of how we "type" people. The process involves focussing on particular aspects while ignoring the rest. His favourite example is the motorist stopped by a police officer. The officer turns out to be a dark-skinned female. Does the motorist view the officer as a cop, as an Arab, as a light-skinned African or as a woman? For some of us, by the time we work it out, the ticket has been dispensed! The delay is due to our propensity to carry the "type" in our minds, then select characteristics that seem to fit. We generally select an essential characteristic and focus on that. Skin colour is an obvious "essential", but left-handedness or dress can be just as suitable. These essentials, he argues, can be reinforced within ourselves, as well. In a famous study, Asian women were set into groups, some reminded that Asians are considered to excel in math, others that women are deficient in those skills. When tested, the ones who believed Asians are superior in math had higher test scores. "Type" reinforcement has many ways of developing and expressing beliefs. The best example of this is the military person. Recruits are trained to shed previ

Us And Them: Understanding Your Tribal Mind isn't the New Age title it sounds to be: it's a survey of how science addresses issues of group identity, using new findings from anthropology to neuroscience to discuss the 'tribal sense' and how it manifests in human affairs. Us And Them defines this sense in both a scientific and cultural perspective, from how those from different cultural roots gain reputations for performance and group reactions to how a sense of place in society affects health, cultural manipulation, and more. A 'must' for any who would understanding group psychology, social and cultural influence, and more.

I found this book after reading the phrase Us and Them in Jared Diamond's Third Chimpanzee (After slogging 1/2 way through Guns, Germs and Steel ; DVD is easy to watch ; Collapse audiobook long but good too) not long ago which got me wondering about this phrase. Lo and behold, I was pleasantly surprised and overjoyed to find a book just published about this phrase. (Ponder that coincidence) While the writing is clear, this book really makes me think and thus I have only been able to read 20-30 pages at a time as I digest it. The devil in understanding why the world is the way it is - today and in the past - is in the details. David Berreby has figured out and articulated a crucial reason. He brings meaning to that phrase - "Everything is Relative." While growing up as an Asian minority in America and traveling to over 35 countries I have sensed and known it, but didn't have a language to define it. Now I do. Someday David Berreby will be remembered as one of the greatest men that ever lived. This book is that profound. As much as the last one I finished - Why We Lie by David Livingstone Smith. Both of these titles have transformed how I view the world and myself. You can't trust all bald men, but you can trust both of these authors named David. I also recommend Ronald Wright's A Short History of Progress.