Societies||4 paths

our human nature leads us to seek the most comfortable role in relation to others. these roles are timeless and have their origin in the earliest days of man. no role is better or worse than the others, and each can find its own sense of societal success and achievement, which is directly connected to one’s values and outlook. it’s common for people to live in multiple categories depending on the social sphere they find themselves in.

1.) the self-reliant – easiest understood as a bear. a self-contained man who finds the most gratification in his own thoughts, actions, and observations. they don’t necessarily hate being around others or wish anyone ill, but find most of what they need in themselves and enjoy a wide degree of personal space.  from ancient times there’ve been people who always had to be out discovering new places – once there was another settler within a couple of miles, the neighborhood was too crowded for the self-reliant, and it was time to hit the road again. this is a difficult type to be these days, considering how few private places are left. this type must either move to the distant reaches of the globe or develop a different sort of privacy within the other groups, a ghost passing by in the unfashionable parts of the collective psyche, alone  even while in the crowd, now that he’s blocked the world from his eyes and ears.

2.) the collaborative – easiest understood as a wolf pack. these individuals seek out a small group to belong to, one that they aid just as much as it aids them. these groups tend to be self-sustaining, stable, and well-balanced, but aren’t likely to innovate quickly or to any huge effect. collaboratives tend to care more about their fellow group members than any other type.

3.) the collective – easiest understood as an ant hill. it’s a mass body that functions more by group survival than individual health. this ensures long-time survival through numbers, and allows collectivists to overcome grave difficulty, and major innovation can result by the long-term or highly intensive collection of man-hours or talent. often in this scheme, you are an anonymous cog while you produce for the collective, but are a collaborative in your time off.

4.) the opportunistic –  these are the people that maintain, support, leech off of, or regulate the balance of the other types. equally like a vulture, worm, or beaver, their contribution to society is hard to understand in that they fill in the gaps, doing anything that is necessary. they often serve as liaisons for the previous 3 types. odd ducks indeed, but certainly necessary.

I initially did not think of these in words…. I thought of a picture that looked something like this.

social grouping

I was thinking about how the groups function in a digitopia, a place where digital technology are woven into everything we do, see, and use… I suspect that the self-reliant will not  plug in past their own “gear,” perhaps even returning to a nomadic lifestyle; alternatively they might utilize new technology to isolate themselves in their own safe zone of personal territory.

the collaboratives, who are mirrors to tribes, often posses what I like to call “vernacular tech”, things that get the job done yet may not spread widely. the value of collaboratives in our increasingly dissociative world is that a community identity can sustain a person’s ability to make moral decisions in a world without guides.

we see the collective in the form of cities; one of the interesting things about collectives (which are often urban and industrial) is that they allow the idea of “work” and “play”. being on the clock is a uniquely collective thing; the self-reliant, a nomad, does what he pleases. the collaborative, who derives meaning from their close group of tribesman, works and relaxes as the need arises. the collective member is usually expected to fulfill a certain duty for a certain length of time, and what he does in his off time is unimportant to the group, as long as it does not affect the security of the group.  “working your shift” allows for powerful economic flows and social/economic/political landscapes to form, ones that collaboratives and self-reliants will often be reactions to. they may be beneficiaries, protesters, alternatives, developers, detractors, constituent groups, or rivals of the local collective, but they rarely are completely unaffected by it.

the opportunists… what can I say about them? they’re in, but not of. part of all things. merchants, peddlers, scavengers, go-betweens… they can be considered a more social version of the self-reliant, but in fact they utilize everything that comes their way, whatever form it may be in or who they receive it from. catalysts. who knows.

what was the point of all this? I’m not sure. perhaps it’s that any time you understand yourself and how you function better, you can figure out what will suit your mode best, and what will work for you when.