Is it hard-wired into people to have to have a person/group they can look down on?

[raccoon]

Someone they can look at and think, "I'm better than X, because (fill in the blank)."

I kind of think it is hard-wired.

I think most people are insecure. I think that is the norm rather than the exception.

[Droopy]

1. No

I don't think anything is "hard-wired" into people. We all have the ability to change.

[supernova]

2. No, but tribalism probably is

The idea that you protect and defend your tribe, however you define that. For many eons that definition has been the immediate family and larger extended family of cousins and relations by marriage. When we all lived in the same area for generations, it probably made sense.

But we are more mobile now and it's kind a silly to defend tribalism at the expense of economic justice.

[woo me with science]

3. Categorization is necessary

in order to make sense of an overwhelmingly huge world. Once you categorize, judgments naturally follow.

[Fire Walk With Me]

4. Yes.

Fear causes the need for security, which causes the need for judgement, which causes one to judge one's self in a position of security.

Ego IS the problem.

[kwassa]

5. Not hard-wired, but certainly prevalent.

It is all about boundries. We live as groups, and to define the group purpose, something good must be defined about why we are in the group and others are not in our group. Those who are not in the group are less good, because they don't have access to the goodness of our group. In some way, they don't deserve the goodness because they are less than us.

The group can be defined by tribe, clan, national identity, religion, political belief or even by occupation or hobby.

This is the cause of much grief in the world.

[unpossibles]

6. I think those who look down on other people suck

They are beneath my contempt.

[billyskank]

7. No, it's just beaten into you as you grow up.

In most societies that have hierarchies, each person generally fulfils a function for the good of the whole, no matter where in the hierarchy they are. The leader, the shaman/priest, the warriors, everybody else, all have their duties to the tribe/nation, and as long as they carry out their duties sufficiently well then harmony mostly reigns. For this to carry on, even the ones at the top need to realise that they are serving the group, and not themselves.

Modern societies, especially Anglo-Saxon ones, are all about talking what you can for yourself and to hell with everybody else. Duties are for losers. The only way we can be kept in line (and so not rebel and kill all the fuckers exploiting us) is for them to divide us. So we, the underclass, are split into groups and taught to hate each other.

On the other hand, this could all be a load of total bollocks. You take a risk in believing anything I say. ;)