> It actually turns out that it’s a very specific sort of personality who cares about status—a very specific person...
This is obviously and trivially false. Why do men take offense at being called pussies, incels, and the like? Because they care about reputation/status. How many girls want to be models, movie stars, pop singers, or more recently, top influencers? A plurality if not the majority. Why? There are easier, more stable, and more profitable careers. Because movie stars, singers, and influencers are famous. They have high social status.
So, apparently I read, too long ago to have a reference, that English public (I.E. private) boarding schools (like Rugby, Eton) are more likely to exacerbate narcissistic tendencies in their students (latest example is Boris Johnston). Possibly due to how young such children are sent off away from their homes (whose parents may well have had in turn their tendencies exacerbated so why would they care). Then these children grow up thus exacerbated into narcissism and who then make laws for the rest of us. I wonder what sort of laws and status games they might prefer. Of course, they do not just get exacerbated in school. Orphanages and prisons do the same. Not forgetting slavery.
anything that removes agency, while rewarding more selfish behaviours, either directly or indirectly, I don't think the contexts creates it, so much as we are more likely to fail to police it as those powers are restricted to those higher up the chain. Of course, in the same context --with similar hard choices--- peeps can behave really really well. I'm not talking legalistically/structurally but statistically/stochastically.
If narcs are around it will exacerbate i.e. reinforce a tendency for "Hierarchical fitness landscapes in social settings" to become arenas for status games, rather than responsibility or efficiency, that they are often sold to the rest of us as being for.
Hierarchies do not cross insure very well when they are hardened into status games, the alphas take everything because they are special and egalitarian morale is destroyed, which all hierarchies in Homo sp are subsidized by. Once destroyed, one bothers to cross insure because everything is fucked anyway. This is called collapse. In chaos system it becomes over-ordered and then chaotic.
Hierarchies are bad at policing narcissism, especially when it is covert, and also when it is grandiose and is seen as confidence or something other than what it is. It is always covert when they are not on top (yet). Hierarchies are bad at rewarding behaviour which questions the current emcumbents, because person=position and status=structure, even if it would save it from destruction. A structure is not it own reward, cover-ups are always the answer. Until all you are covering-up are runs.
I guess I am saying that one should be able to get some numbers about some _function_ where more hierarchic organisations/groups will attract/reward narcissists more, who will then reinforce and encourage more hierarchic structures because such structures accord status, and which, because they are then made by more narcissistic types, will reflect that more strongly than if no narcs were involved in the line of command. Leading to over-ordering, and chaos. (At which time the grandiose will consider themselves disruptors and chaos surfers and see an opportunity.)(so special).
I went for a job that I didn't want, i.e. I did an application because I wanted to support my manager (one of two jobs and I wanted neither-- more admin in both). I did not want peeps across the wider org wondering why none of their underlings applied for a "better" position. Anyways, unfortunately the narc got the job as like a administrivia worker and within about two weeks was asking to have an assistant manager title. (I later felt guilty about not putting more into get the job). This is before we realised covert narcissists were a thing. Also, PROTIP, they like uniforms, but do not look good in them, but do not tell them this... especially when they are out riding the boundary of their fiefdom.
Fortunately my manager was very egalitarian in a teamwork way and they/we worked it out all fine
This is great, something like this has been in my drafts, my to-do lists, but now I don't have to. In my recent post to day I have just realised reading this that I've assumed/guessed exactly what you are saying here. My head has been wondering along at an angle looking at this.
Feel frreeee to read it at even though you will gain no status
Consider enabling TTS
https://support.substack.com/hc/en-us/articles/7265753724692-How-do-I-listen-to-a-Substack-post-
(Request form)
https://airtable.com/appOb5A6BIUvET1Cb/shr11c70LRWq9saOb
I made the request! We'll see if they let me add the feature - looks like it's still in beta
> Seriously, Who Cares About Status?
>
> It actually turns out that it’s a very specific sort of personality who cares about status—a very specific person...
This is obviously and trivially false. Why do men take offense at being called pussies, incels, and the like? Because they care about reputation/status. How many girls want to be models, movie stars, pop singers, or more recently, top influencers? A plurality if not the majority. Why? There are easier, more stable, and more profitable careers. Because movie stars, singers, and influencers are famous. They have high social status.
So, apparently I read, too long ago to have a reference, that English public (I.E. private) boarding schools (like Rugby, Eton) are more likely to exacerbate narcissistic tendencies in their students (latest example is Boris Johnston). Possibly due to how young such children are sent off away from their homes (whose parents may well have had in turn their tendencies exacerbated so why would they care). Then these children grow up thus exacerbated into narcissism and who then make laws for the rest of us. I wonder what sort of laws and status games they might prefer. Of course, they do not just get exacerbated in school. Orphanages and prisons do the same. Not forgetting slavery.
I understood all of this up to the last sentence; are you trying to say that slavery exacerbates Narcissistic tendencies? In slaves?
anything that removes agency, while rewarding more selfish behaviours, either directly or indirectly, I don't think the contexts creates it, so much as we are more likely to fail to police it as those powers are restricted to those higher up the chain. Of course, in the same context --with similar hard choices--- peeps can behave really really well. I'm not talking legalistically/structurally but statistically/stochastically.
If narcs are around it will exacerbate i.e. reinforce a tendency for "Hierarchical fitness landscapes in social settings" to become arenas for status games, rather than responsibility or efficiency, that they are often sold to the rest of us as being for.
Hierarchies do not cross insure very well when they are hardened into status games, the alphas take everything because they are special and egalitarian morale is destroyed, which all hierarchies in Homo sp are subsidized by. Once destroyed, one bothers to cross insure because everything is fucked anyway. This is called collapse. In chaos system it becomes over-ordered and then chaotic.
Hierarchies are bad at policing narcissism, especially when it is covert, and also when it is grandiose and is seen as confidence or something other than what it is. It is always covert when they are not on top (yet). Hierarchies are bad at rewarding behaviour which questions the current emcumbents, because person=position and status=structure, even if it would save it from destruction. A structure is not it own reward, cover-ups are always the answer. Until all you are covering-up are runs.
I guess I am saying that one should be able to get some numbers about some _function_ where more hierarchic organisations/groups will attract/reward narcissists more, who will then reinforce and encourage more hierarchic structures because such structures accord status, and which, because they are then made by more narcissistic types, will reflect that more strongly than if no narcs were involved in the line of command. Leading to over-ordering, and chaos. (At which time the grandiose will consider themselves disruptors and chaos surfers and see an opportunity.)(so special).
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616649241 as a lead
I went for a job that I didn't want, i.e. I did an application because I wanted to support my manager (one of two jobs and I wanted neither-- more admin in both). I did not want peeps across the wider org wondering why none of their underlings applied for a "better" position. Anyways, unfortunately the narc got the job as like a administrivia worker and within about two weeks was asking to have an assistant manager title. (I later felt guilty about not putting more into get the job). This is before we realised covert narcissists were a thing. Also, PROTIP, they like uniforms, but do not look good in them, but do not tell them this... especially when they are out riding the boundary of their fiefdom.
Fortunately my manager was very egalitarian in a teamwork way and they/we worked it out all fine
This is great, something like this has been in my drafts, my to-do lists, but now I don't have to. In my recent post to day I have just realised reading this that I've assumed/guessed exactly what you are saying here. My head has been wondering along at an angle looking at this.
Feel frreeee to read it at even though you will gain no status
https://whyweshould.substack.com/p/a-morally-authoritative-intangible
[analogy code breaker:
ideology=worldbuilding=creating-status-games/arenas =imperial choices
Agreeaableness makes the world=worlding = most of us
]