Herd people. Let's expose! Herd instinct? Sexual herd instinct

Herd instinct and its manifestations. Varieties of the desire to be like everyone else. Correction of this condition in yourself.

What is herd instinct

The desire to be like everyone else has been studied in detail by specialists and voiced in many scientific works. F. Nietzsche called it the tendency of mediocre individuals to distrust and hate relatively extraordinary individuals. V. Trotter, an English social psychologist and surgeon, examined in it a person’s desire to join certain groups and social associations and at the same time copy the behavior of their leaders.

P.A. Kropotkin, a scientist and Russian revolutionary anarchist, believed that solidarity was a quality that was inherent in almost every person.

At the University of Leeds (UK), scientists have put forward a theory regarding 5%. They showed by example that this number of people is quite enough to subjugate 95% of other ordinary people.

IN in this case The herd instinct automatically kicks in, and on a subconscious level, a person begins to do what 5% of demonstrators do. Even if he did not like the performance of an artist, he automatically begins to applaud him because of the applause of part of the audience.

Varieties of herd instinct

This phenomenon covers many aspects of human life. Among them, the leading positions are occupied by religion, politics, art, advertising and the sex life of ordinary people. It is in these areas that it is easiest to manipulate people's consciousness.

Religious herd instinct

The spiritual essence of a person is often based on church tenets. In most cases, they do not carry a destructive seed for people’s consciousness, because in a moderate dose they offer them to understand the essence of moral standards. However, the herd instinct on religious grounds is not always harmless, as evidenced by the following points:

• Sects. Such islands of “spiritual cleansing” began to operate most actively in our country in the early 90s. Taking advantage of the confusion of people after the collapse of the USSR, pseudo-prophets began to create societies that were later able to cloud the brains of even adequate individuals. At the same time, the herd instinct worked uninterruptedly, because the person wanted to believe in the best and reached for a ghostly dream. Experts were interested in the fact that the sect leaders were excellent psychologists and speakers. In their arguments to the public, they relied on Christian postulates, while destroying human souls and gathering fanatics into a controlled herd. The most dangerous sects are Jehovah's Witnesses, Calvary Chapel and Peoples Temple.
• Communes. These organizations can be called the highest manifestation of a dangerous association of people on religious grounds. If the community lives at a monastery, where everyone can see its activities, then this is not a problem. However, manipulators do not stop at such modest means of obtaining funds for their existence and arrange entire settlements of adherents of the created idol. An example is the “Manson Family” community, in which the herd instinct made people slaves of someone else’s will and cruel killers.

Sexual herd instinct

In this case, the conversation will focus on stereotypes that are inherent modern society. To some extent, the herd instinct is one of the main mechanisms of sexual selection:

1. Dogma about procreation. One of the most common stereotypes is that people (especially women) worry about their infertility. If you do not take into account the moral side of the issue, but turn on logic, then Interesting Facts. Society is wary of those individuals who cannot reproduce offspring. There is a stereotype that a person must continue the family line and give the new citizen his own set of chromosomes. However, with a great desire to have a child, people often forget that orphanages exist. Psychologists believe the reason for this fear is associating oneself with the animal environment. In any herd, an infertile female automatically becomes the lowest link among animals. For the same reason, society, with the help of church dogmas, condemns concepts such as homosexuality, lesbianism and other types of sexuality that do not ultimately lead to the conception of a child.
2. Social cliché about jealousy. Another stereotype is the opinion that this is a manifestation of love for your sexual partner. Experts say that the voiced feeling has nothing to do with passion and the desire to always be close to a certain person. They consider the basis of jealousy to be the fear of losing their rank in the herd hierarchy.
3. Monogamy stereotype. Some researchers believe that this model of the institution of marriage was created by people who feared competition from males and females of higher herd rank. According to sex therapists, the idea remains a pointless waste of time: representatives of the herd hierarchy can still afford to have a harem. Sexual freedom is unrealistic among people with a herd instinct. Whether this is good or bad is up to each person to decide based on his views on life and morality.

Political herd instinct

To some extent, influential people in this field of human activity are able to give even the most clever religious manipulators a head start. The herd instinct in politics has 4 types, which look like this:

• Patriotism. Such a social feeling is inherent in people who love their homeland and the population that lives in it. It was this political principle that helped many peoples repel the attacks of the enemy who encroached on their lands. However, it is quite dangerous when it develops into fanaticism and hypertrophied leavened patriotism.
• Nationalism. This ideology can be of a civil, ethnic and cultural nature. The manifestation of the herd instinct can develop into aggression with extreme nationalism, because it begins to resemble extremism.
• Racism. This kind of belief system has no place in civilized society. At one time, the herd instinct played a cruel joke on the planters of the southern states of America, who owned black slaves. Policies of racial discrimination may call for either the deprivation of the rights and freedoms of people from another human population system or their complete destruction.
• Religious hostility. This intolerance towards representatives of other faiths and its propaganda are punishable by law. However, quite often the herd instinct kicks in when the crowd is turned on by an experienced manipulator.

Exclusively patriotism, within reasonable limits, can be called an adequate manifestation of one’s consciousness. The remaining factors voiced fueled many wars that claimed a large number of human lives.

Advertising herd instinct

It is no secret that videos with an element of propaganda that have filled the airwaves affect the human psyche. Numerous corporations have seen a real bonanza in the herd instinct factor.

Quite often children become the targets of advertising. It is important for them to get a fashionable toy that does not leave TV screens. Moreover, your classmates have it, but you need to be like everyone else and not yield to them in anything. A child will prefer an advertised and rather harmful sweet, but will not ask his parents to buy a high-quality domestic product.

Some adults are not far removed from their children and strive to take possession of a branded item. They reason on the principle that if they take everything, then it is a profitable and rational purchase. Such people are magnetically affected by slogans like “do as we do; do it with us."

Politicians also skillfully use the psychology of the herd instinct. Quite often, the advertising of their party looks like a leader in the foreground, behind whom stands a whole crowd of like-minded people. After the communist videos, war veterans feel like an important component of the party, which reminds them of the times of their distant youth.

Herd instinct in art

In this case, the conversation will again focus on stereotypes. If you want to be known as an esthete, then you must like “La Gioconda” and you must freeze in admiration at the sounds organ music Bach. This is necessary because it is accepted in society and approved by the majority of its members.

If you don't like the theater, you are immediately labeled as a person who cannot understand beauty.

People themselves develop a herd instinct, obeying the opinion of the crowd. Any preferences in art are a matter of taste, but the resulting stereotypes are firmly deposited in the minds of ordinary people.

Ways to combat the herd instinct

People who either have a poorly developed desire to be like everyone else, or who have it completely absent, find it difficult to adapt to society.

Society does not like “white crows” and calls them crazy people. The grief of such individuals is precisely from their mind. Possessing high intelligence, they do not want to blend in with the crowd. Eventually people like this remain lonely rebels. It is quite difficult not to cause rejection from society and at the same time be an extraordinary person. However, even mediocrity does not always dream of becoming a small link in a single whole.

Psychologists advise correcting your herd instinct as follows:

1. Staying calm in any situation. The energy of the crowd only affects a person when he is emotionally overexcited. This is especially true for overly impressionable and exalted individuals. Calmness is a powerful weapon against manipulators.
2. Turning on the brain 100%. A highly developed personality will never become a victim of the herd mentality. Pseudo-prophets usually do not associate with such people. The exception is the leaders of Scientology, who were hooked by John Travolta and Tom Cruise.
3. Analysis of your own behavior. It is recommended to understand your inner “I”, highlighting the positive, negative traits character and existing desires. Once you understand yourself, it’s easier to develop future plan actions. You can allow ambition to take precedence over prudence for a while, because it is they who are the incentive to destroy your desire to be like everyone else.
4. Destroying stereotypes. It is not necessary to become a rebel and go against the crowd. However, people must understand that in front of them is a person with a clear life position and personal preferences. You don’t have to go against your will to watch a fashionable film or visit a well-advertised exhibition just because they caused a public stir.
5. Raising self-esteem. Individuals with a herd instinct are most often not confident in themselves. They are hurt by criticism from the outside, and they try to stay in the shadow of the leader. You should love yourself and understand your individuality.
6. Doing something interesting. In the company of extraordinary people there is a reality and you can learn something yourself. At the same time, you should not be afraid of the formation of a herd instinct in such a community, because such individuals do not copy each other’s actions.
7. Developing a sense of humor and communication skills. It is the voiced qualities that distinguish a person from the gray mass. To do this, it is recommended to read humorous books and watch funny talk shows.
8. Life for yourself and family. It is necessary, first of all, to put your own interests above all else, and not the opinions of others that society imposes. If this does not turn into selfishness, then such a line of behavior will not allow a person to merge with the crowd.

What is herd instinct - look at the video:

This article will be dedicated to people who are accustomed to living according to the “herd principle”. From the point of view of banal erudition, the herd, as an individual, critically metaphosizing in its abstraction, it cannot be ignored by theoretical subjectivism - this is how the concept of the human herd sounds in a psychology manual.

This or that value of the sum depends on the value of the units... Our entire sociology knows no other instinct than the instinct of the herd, that is, summed up zeros, where each zero has “the same rights,” where it is considered a virtue to be a zero... Nietzsche

But, we all know very well that the herd is people who have their own leader. A striking example of a herd are the so-called “Bounty” from the film “Bad Girls” (starring Lindsay Lohan, I advise you to watch it at your leisure). The Bounty is a school herd, led by Regina George, the leader. Its principle is this: whatever Regina tells us, we will do.

Yes, on the one hand, it’s not bad to be in such a herd: you have your own specific place (fun or fashionista, for example), everyone thinks and treats different things the same way, and in general you don’t have to strain your brain too much, because the leader decides everything for you .

The crowd doesn't like loners; it recognizes only false people who imitate each other in everything. The crowd despises anyone who keeps to himself, who stands up for his rights, defends his freedom, does his own thing, regardless of the consequences. — Osho

But not everything is as good as it seems at first glance. Let's look at everything pros and cons of herd. To those already listed above pros some of my friends (who live according to the “herd principle”) they include: understanding each other, ease of communication, mutual assistance and... Doesn’t this remind you of some kind of closed sect? Joke. Yes, it’s not bad if you occupy a certain place in the herd, but a counter question arises: “Who am I if there is no herd nearby?”

The biggest disadvantage the herd is what is disadvantaged in it and human individualism is destroyed. This implies incorrect behavior, which is considered wrong in the herd: you cannot do something without the consent of others, and if you do, Goodbye herd. A little radical, but that's how it is. Everyone knows the concept of collectivism from the history of the USSR.

The crowd can forgive anything and anyone, but not a person who is able to remain himself under the pressure of its contemptuous ridicule. — Ayn Rand

To some extent, it may have justified itself, but what did it lead to - collapse Soviet Union. In essence, the USSR (with all its advantages) is the same herd, only on a larger scale.

The “herd principle” of life is with us every day: one of his friends bought some new fashionable blouse, and literally the next day all the other friends got an almost similar one, some of the friends started smoking new cigarettes and everyone, praising this new brand, began to smoke the same ones themselves.

People can only be tolerated alone; a crowd is too close to the animal world. — Franz Grillparzer

This, as an unconditioned reflex Pavlova (when the dog produced gastric juice when the light bulb was turned on), which is produced, but which can be easily gotten rid of.

People who express their individuality and are not part of the herd receive some kind of pressure in return from all sides. It’s just that the herd destroys everyone who is not part of it: the individualist’s “dirty laundry” gets aired, gossip arises, and in general everything is done according to the principle “If you are not like everyone else, then you have no place on this planet at all.”

Do you know why this is done? All because the herd is afraid of individualists. This is due to the fact that an individualist, morally and psychological concepts, much stronger than these supporters of herd life.

People who are not afraid to show maximum enthusiasm and creativity achieve the highest results both in life and in recognition in society (over time, of course). I don’t mean standing out from the crowd with red hair and a lot of tattoos on the body (although as an option, it’s really nothing). Just do not give in to pressure from others and do not always “adapt” to others, showing your character and nature.

In addition to the instincts listed in the book, we will consider another, so-called “herd instinct”. We will understand by it inexplicable human desire(herd animal too) join your herd.

In fact, we explained in the book “” that this desire stems only from, since it is in the herd that it is most reliable for an individual to preserve his gene. And the herd instinct does not bring anything fundamentally new to us.

However, the other day I came across the following definition of the herd instinct on Wikipedia:

Herd instinct is a mechanism underlying the instinct of self-preservation, applicable equally to both people and animals.

The herd instinct shows how people or animals in a group can act collectively, without centralized leadership. As V. Trotter noted in his work “The Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War,” it is pointless to look for the causes and derivatives of the herd instinct, since it is primary and cannot be resolved.

I realized that we should examine this issue in more detail.

First of all, relying only on , we will show our complete disagreement with all provisions of this definition.

• Firstly, as shown in, there is no independent instinct of self-preservation. There is only a corollary of the same name from the Law (or Instinct) of Gene Preservation.

• Secondly, it is NOT pointless to look for the causes and derivatives of the herd instinct, since it is precisely NOT primary.

Let us recall along the way how primary and secondary statements (or instincts) differ. If statement A follows from statement B, but statement A does not follow from statement B, then statement A will be called primary, and statement B secondary or a consequence of A.

If the herd instinct were primary, then how could we explain the regular disintegration of the herd? Especially the constant expulsion from the herd of young males who have reached reproductive age or, conversely, of elderly males?

And they are explained very simply, through

• Young, grown-up males begin to pose a threat to the genetic purity of the offspring of a harem of a dominant, but not yet old and strong male.

• Expelled young males leave the herd and begin to look for an opportunity to form their own herd, not out of herd instinct, but with the sole purpose of preserving their gene.

“Why do they expel old males?” -you ask. Yes, for almost the same reason.

• Usually this is an aged dominant male who lost a tournament fight for his harem to a new young male contender, but has not yet lost his reproductive power and therefore needs to be constantly monitored. In addition, the old male very soon turns into a burden and an extra mouth, unable to independently obtain food for himself. The end of such old lonely males is always sad.

As we see, no herd instinct works and everything comes down to !

And now the harmful reader should ask: “Why then don’t they expel elderly females who are not capable of procreation?” The answer is again simple.

• Elderly females, as a rule, are excellent nannies and are often simply necessary for caring for and raising the offspring of the dominant male, i.e. the reason is always the same: !

Nevertheless, we will continue to use the term Herd Instinct, remembering, however, that it is a simple consequence.

The situation described above can be observed especially well in a pride of lions or a herd of elephants. This unenviable final fate of male lions and elephants after completing the program is no exception.

In other species it can be even sadder: in bees, drones die immediately after copulation; in grasshoppers and spiders, males are immediately eaten by females after copulation. This list, sad in relation to males, can be continued for a very long time, and it pushes to even more gloomy thoughts.

Now I am tormented by vague doubts that in the distant historical past they treated our brother “the peasant” in the same way or almost the same way.

You ask: Reasons? I explain: Humanity lived for 3-4 million years, practically no different from the animal world around it, driven only by the same thing. Scientists find traces of human cannibalism in all parts of the world until very recently. The same is true of human sacrifice.

The beginnings of humanistic morality appeared, one might say, yesterday by historical standards, and there is no serious reason to believe that in ancient times males in the human herd were treated better than males in the rest of the animal world.

Now we will begin to study the herd instinct in the most interesting herd - human society. In the most interesting way, because a person has another important option that does not exist in the animal world. This !

The herd instinct resides in man just as in any other herd animal, and the overwhelming majority of people follow it. Is this good or evil? We will try to give here, as exhaustively as possible, an answer to this question.

The list of these people in the entire history of mankind, in all types of its activities, is extremely small. Several thousand. Not more. In any case, a small percentage of the entire population.

Once, when I was young, I asked a friend: “If the entire civilization was created by this small percentage, then why did God create everyone else?” The answer was wonderful: “In order to give birth to this small fraction of a percent!”

And in general, it is impossible to imagine a society consisting entirely of geniuses, completely free from the herd instinct! It would fall apart instantly!

The other day I was listening to a television conversation-interview two the smartest people, Dmitry Gordon and Viktor Shenderovich. They also talked about the herd instinct and came to the conclusion that it, this instinct, is always evil, citing correct examples of the destructive action of this instinct in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, and that everything right and good is done by single people without this instinct.

With all due respect to these interlocutors, I cannot agree with both of these statements.

• Firstly, what is wrong with the herd instinct when it raises a person, along with all his people, to defend the Motherland, to the Revolution?

• Secondly, people like Stalin and Hitler were also absolutely free from the herd instinct. But, at the same time, these people, who hated, skillfully manipulating the herd instinct of the crowd, led their peoples in the twentieth century to the most terrible disasters in the history of mankind.

Let us note that in all totalitarian societies such as fascism or communism, following one’s “herd” or, in other words, nurturing the herd instinct becomes government policy, and any deviation from it is severely punished. Those who lived under the communists or the Nazis remember this very well.

The attitude towards the herd instinct in society, especially among the intelligentsia, is quite arrogant and contemptuous. If you open Google on this topic, you will immediately see a bunch of articles about how to get rid of the herd instinct. At the same time, the overwhelming majority of society, blindly and strictly obeying this instinct, is embarrassed to admit it.

The book “Jonathan Livingston Seagull,” written by Richard Bach in 1970, once served as the anthem for everyone who considers themselves free from the herd instinct.

Now let’s think about whether we should always be ashamed of the herd instinct? Why do we, without thinking, run after the crowd in case of danger?

I am reminded of television images of the tsunami flooding in Thailand in 2004, when crowds of people began to scatter randomly in different directions. Only those who competently began to climb the hills or ran up the stairs of multi-story strong hotels, as well as those who ran after them, following the herd instinct, survived.

At the end of their conversation, Gordon and Shenderovich came to the same conclusion that when you see a huge crowd running somewhere, immediately run to the side. As we can see from the examples above, this advice is generally incorrect.

You need to know why the crowd is running, what slogans they have, are they not encroaching on anyone’s rights to or?

In the textbook examples of communism and Nazism, their slogans quite openly called for the destruction of these rights from the nobles, the rich, the bourgeoisie in the first case, and from Jews and other non-Aryan races in the second.

The very Principle of Democracy, when the minority is obliged to obey the majority, is the very Herd Instinct! Who and when proved that the majority was right? Nobody ever! This cannot be explained by anything other than the herd instinct.

But, as the above examples show, Democracy does not always guarantee the right choice of decision, which is what happened in Germany in 1933.

The Democracy's most recent blunder was Brexit, where its supporters won by less than 2%. A mistake, because Brexit does not increase Freedom of Choice in anything, on the contrary, overall reducing its level in Britain. This will become obvious to everyone within a few years of his implementation of Brexit, unless it is completely canceled by a second referendum. The most “advanced” British people foresee this today.

However, by democratically accepting the power of the majority, we expect that its decision will most often be correct, and history confirms this. Moreover, if Democracy made a mistake, but the mechanisms of Freedom of Choice (democratic institutions) were preserved, then this mistake can be corrected fairly quickly.

There are no special historical paths or national characteristics to hell! There is simply a lead and a lag. And it's easy to prove!

If, for example, there are two states A and B with different forms of government, ways of life, and after some time the form of government in state B and the way of life become the same as in A, then this means only one thing: state B is evolutionarily behind in development from state A.

We know of many examples of countries where women who traditionally wore the hijab are beginning to take them off at the risk of losing personal freedom (Iran), and we do not know of any examples of a single country where the reverse process has taken place.

This, of course, does not take into account the case when Islamists recently came to power in Egypt for a short time and forcibly put hijabs on women. It was pure short-term fluctuation.

And one more interesting thought: countries where permanent presidents who have come to power try to prolong their power by hook or by crook, forgery and fraud, resemble animal herds or packs of animals, also ruled by permanent leaders, dominant males until their weakened ones are overthrown males are younger and stronger. From here, draw a conclusion which society is closer to its primitive bestial historical beginning.

Well, now, let’s formulate the promised answer to the question posed in the title: Is herd instinct good or evil? Should we follow the herd instinct?

From all that has been said above, it follows that there is no deterministic answer to this question! There is only a probabilistic answer. It is best to always think with your own head.

But if you don’t have your own decision, then it’s best to join the group where you most see recognized authoritative and smart people.

Well, if you have to choose a solution at random, then join the largest group, in the hope that there will be smart, experienced people there.

None of these tips will give you a 100% guarantee. Only probability!

Generally speaking, our the world fundamentally non-deterministic. It is probabilistic and there are more questions with probabilistic answers than questions with deterministic answers. Physicists were the first to understand this at the beginning of the last century, when they delved into the microworld.

In conclusion, I will give an example from recent news about outbreaks of measles in such civilized countries as France.

The fact is that these outbreaks were the result of some parents refusing to vaccinate their children. Some for orthodox religious reasons, others, having read that vaccination has side effects. Both refer to personal freedom of choice in what concerns their children.

However, if the probability of a side effect is one in a thousand, then the probability of becoming infected healthy child in close contact with the patient, almost one hundred percent. Moreover, with modern movements of people, it is almost impossible to ensure absolutely reliable quarantine.

So then choose the probability you prefer. In this regard, discussions are being raised in France about forced restrictions on personal information when there is a threat to society, i.e. the rest.

I remember that in the Soviet Union they vaccinated all children without asking either them or their parents. I would not object to such forced vaccination.

Karmak Bagisbaev, professor of mathematics, author of the book