The Monkeysphere

[Deleted472477User]

There's an interesting theory that says we all have a 'monkeysphere':

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

 

the tl;dr version: Humans can be uncaring jerks if it doesn't affect them and their circle directly. The group of people you conceptualize as individuals & can empathize with. All humans outside of it are more or less just a walking bag of flesh, blood & bones that just so happen to be the same species as you. The maximum number of people that can be kept in a monkeysphere is estimated to be around 150.

 

Now, to some, this explains a lot. "I don't have to be nice to that person on the forum with whom I disagreed; they're not in my monekyspere." "Who cares if eleventy thousand people lose jobs by me outsourcing to some other country; they aren't in my monkeysphere." "I don't have to be nice to that person on the phone; they aren't in my monkeysphere." And so on.

 

Even so, people are capable of incredible acts of compassion and kindness to strangers. We help each other out during disasters, some of them half a world away.

 

So, do you think the idea of the monkeysphere is a solid one? Or is it just more humanity trying to justify its own (on occasion) dickish behavior?

[Aurielius]

If you have ever done a random act of kindness for a complete stranger just because the opportunity was there, then how does that figure into the 'monkeysphere' hypothesis?

[Deleted472477User]

If you have ever done a random act of kindness for a complete stranger just because the opportunity was there, then how does that figure into the 'monkeysphere' hypothesis?

 

I'm glad you asked!

 

There's a quote from the article I linked:

 

 

"Well, I'm nice to strangers. Have you considered that maybe you're just an *bleep*?"

 

Sure, you probably don't go out of your way to be mean to strangers. You don't go out of your way to be mean to stray dogs, either.

 

The problem is that eventually, the needs of you or those within your Monkeysphere will require screwing someone outside it (even if that need is just venting some tension and anger via exaggerated insults). This is why most of us wouldn't dream of stealing money from the pocket of the old lady next door, but don't mind stealing cable, adding a shady exemption on our tax return, or quietly celebrating when they forget to charge us for something at the restaurant.

 

You may have a list of rationalizations long enough to circle the Earth, but the truth is that in our monkey brains the old woman next door is a human being while the cable company is a big, cold, faceless machine. That the company is, in reality, nothing but a group of people every bit as human as the old lady, or that some kind old ladies actually work there and would lose their jobs if enough cable were stolen, rarely occurs to us.

 

It's as close of an answer to that question as I could really find. My personal answer along with this is: most people want to think of themselves as nice, decent people, and will be as helpful as possible without going too far into 'monekysphere' territory. Meaning we will normally do the minimum possible that still allows us to feel that we've done something helpful for a stranger, but not to the point that we would for people in our monkeysphere.

 

Mind, there obviously exists people who are more generous and caring with strangers than with their own families, and people who are their own monkeysphere, but they're the exceptions.

[Pyrosocial]

when I was in orlando, I saw a women in a wheelchair wheeling her self up a ramp to a ride, and I got behind her and pushed her up the ramp.

 

I'm fairly certain that she wasn't in my "monkey sphere". Interesting thoery though.

[marharth]

There have been multiple studies done that most humans prefer to stay within their own group and will go out of their way to do so.

 

There was a study done were a single test subject and a bunch of actors were put into a room and asked questions. The actors pretended to be test subjects. The testers asked extremely easy questions (like whats one plus one) and the actors always answered wrong. The test subject would also answer wrong just to fit in with the group.

 

The thing about this is that some humans have smaller groups, and some humans can have humanity as a whole as their group.

 

Some humans could only care about themselves and their family, some could only care about their city, some could only care about their country, and some could have the world as a whole within their group.

[grannywils]

Well, I don't believe in the whole Monkeysphere philosophy at all. And, although I might have expressed myself differently, I will basically go along with what Marharth has said above (as long as the whole group being able to be enlarged to include whatever one chooses is a part of his theory). And because I have had a tendency to be a bit hard on Marharth in the past, I am not going to expand on how I might have expressed it differently (except I would leave out the word "only"). He did just fine... :thumbsup:

[draconix]

In our large new world, I don't think our brains have really developed the ability to feel compassion for people we have never met. For instance, I will jump into a freezing pond and ruin some $100 shoes in the process, risking my life and limb for a child who's fallen through the ice, and this is true of most people. However, how many of us donate 20c a day to save a child's life in Africa?

[SilverDNA]

when I was in orlando, I saw a women in a wheelchair wheeling her self up a ramp to a ride, and I got behind her and pushed her up the ramp.

 

I'm fairly certain that she wasn't in my "monkey sphere". Interesting theory though.

 

(off topic) @Pyrosocial I hoped you asked like a true boy scout before helping the women because i know from own experience that it is considered rude by disabled persons in a wheel chair to be helped up a ramp without being asked for help 1st)

 

Kay back on monkey spheres .. Btw Thanks Psychosocial because i think i can to a degree explain how you example appears to be a monkey sphere related)

 

I find the Theory quite possible because in before the last 300 years the most common folks thought along that line (That if somebody is way and not to be seen, he shall not occupy the mind anymore). How far we developed away or not or have we compensated somehow? is an interesting matter.

But it is still a theory in social behavior. There have been no studies and no analytics so it is still at an early stage of scientific abstract construct. A theory!

 

But this isn't a new theory at all Douglas Adams played with it in one of his hitchhiker novels .., because it is only labeled new as monkey sphere.

read up the wiki if you don't believe me because I was referring to the SEP-Field or fully written out (Someone Else's Problem)

Click here for the Wiki entry

 

You only notice when someone to you unknown enters your "monkey sphere" / SEP-Field when you need to make one of the following options come to mind that shall lead to a decision in helping someone unknown:

1. Should , can or will I help?

2. Is it saver to not help?

3. How much trouble can I get when I help?

4. Is help necessary?

6. What have I to lose if I help?

7. Is that someone needing help?

 

Some people decide to help out of an impulse some other think it over. People of the 1st group have basically made good experiences in helping others unknown to them while the later has had bad experiences and is primary in a phase of wanting to but still thinking what is the best way to get them selfs out as fast as possible if it turns out that it becomes a bad idea to have helped.

 

Now What happens if you break the barriers of empty phrases and the "monkey sphere" / SEP-Field in the supermarket ?

Example there is a mother with three children in the line at the checkout right in front of you. She has a hard time keeping the 3 year old the 5 and 8 year old children under control. She is certainly annoyed and the father of the children is nowhere to be seen and the line behind you is long because it is Friday or Saturday, so everybody is going to shop for weekend.

Now wouldn't it hurt if you ask the woman to help her to put her stuff on the terminal. (and she has a lot of stuff in her shopping cart)

Now the decision is yours to break the "monkey sphere" / SEP-Field here what will you do?

Now how do you break the "monkey sphere" / SEP-Field with the girl that operates the checkout or in a bakery or butchery how would you try to bring that field down against empty phrases that shall keep up the distance?

Interesting isn't it when it comes to the normal daily life?

Now if you haven't tried this already i encourage you to find out for your selfs.

Edited July 28, 2011 by SilverDNA

[grannywils]

I'm back on this one again just briefly. Unfortunately since I am still out of town it is difficult for me to be in closer touch with some of you. i.e. Silver, who is a good friend of mine. I'm just trying to be sure I understand what you are saying here Silver. Are you agreeing with the whole Monkeysphere philosophy in general? Or are you suggesting that it is a possibility that exists in mankind, and that in some individual cases, people behave in this manner?

 

I did read the link posted by the OP. It comes from a comedy site, and it is very interesting and amusing. There are even facets of it that I can find realistic enough to be a tiny bit believable. But only on an individual basis. It is not simply a matter of charity and to whom one is willing to give, or for whom one is willing to risk his life. Soldiers all over the world are risking their lives every day for people they will never know, in many cases in countries whose names some of them cannot even pronounce, let alone spell. Although I do believe that we did originate from the apes (and we cannot go any further into that topic here, I know); I also believe that we did evolve somewhat further than they did. Our minds do not need the names and addresses of each and every human being on the planet in order to feel compassion, or even dispassion for that matter for our fellow man.

 

I recognize that some of us are "more sensitive" than others of us. I am saying that as I know that I will be accused of it when I get home... :rolleyes: But I am not really referring to myself. I just do not believe that most people are as cold and/or mechanical as this would make us sound. Maybe I am totally misreading it. If so, I apologize and you may ignore me completely.

[Keanumoreira]

I find this topic interesting and I think I understand what they are getting at. For one, humans, as proposed by science, are the decendants and the relatives of the entire primate family within the group of mammals. This group in the animal kingdom, primarily the primates, contain some of the world's most intelligent creatures. Because we are placed as a species under the primate family, we therefore contain complex emotions and actions not normally seen in the animal kingdom. A lot of animals act like this "monkeysphere", in the way that if they contain their own family, they will often associate with other creatures, even in the same species', with aggression, unless it deals with mating purposes. Humans and primates are the sameway, although, unlike most other species', they both choose between aggression or acceptance, depending on certain things like mood or whatever it may be.

 

I agree with the monkeysphere because a lot of people tend to only show compassion and concern for those they know and love. We live in a world today where most of our animal instincts are erased or ignored by civilization, so, people are generally more accepting of people outside their friendship and family, however, what we will do for them is limited, like, for example, we may struggle to give someone food in a disaster if it means losing that food for ourselves and our family. That sphere is still existant and in effect, even if we are more opening to people we don't associate ourselves with.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Keanumoreira