Swarm Theory & Group Psychology

coberst · 07-3-2007, 08:47 AM

Swarm Theory & Group Psychology

Scientists are studying and trying to develop an ability to emulate the actions of animal swarms. The birds and the bees can do it; why cannot humans emulate their behavior to our advantage?

The collective behavior of animal swarms displays advantageous collective actions without the guidance of organized leadership. Ants, as individuals, are not clever—as a collective ants, bees, birds, caribou, etc. are amazingly clever—there seems to exist something one might label as swarm intelligence—simple creatures following simple rules equal swarm intelligence.

Computer engineers attempt to emulate swarm intelligence to solve complex human problems.

Compare animal swarm intelligence with group psychology. What is the nature of the ‘group mind’, i.e. the mental changes such individuals undergo as a result of becoming a group?

A bond develops much like cells which constitute a living body—group mind is more of an unconscious than a conscious force—there are motives for action that elude conscious attention—distinctiveness and individuality become group behavior based upon unconscious motives—there develops a sentiment of invincible power, anonymous and irresponsible attitudes--repressions of unconscious forces under normal situations are ignored—conscience which results from social anxiety disappear.

Contagion sets in—hypnotic order becomes prevalent—individuals sacrifice personal interest for the group interest.

Suggestibility, of which contagion is a symptom, leads to the lose of conscious personality—the individual follows suggestions for actions totally contradictory to person conscience—hypnotic like fascination sets in—will and discernment vanishes—direction is taken from the leader in an hypnotic like manner—the conscious personality disappears.

“Moreover, by the mere fact that he forms part of an organized group, a man descends several rungs in the ladder of civilization.” Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian—a creature acting by instinct. “He possesses the spontaneity, the violence, the ferocity, and also the enthusiasm and heroism of primitive beings.”

There is a lowering of intellectual ability “pointing to its similarity with the mental life of primitive people and of children…A group is credulous and easily influenced”—the improbable seldom exists—they think in images—feelings are very simple and exaggerated—the group knows neither doubt nor uncertainty—extremes are prevalent, antipathy becomes hate and suspicion becomes certainty.

Force is king—force is respected and obeyed without question—kindness is weakness—tradition is triumphant—words have a magical power—supernatural powers are easily accepted—groups never thirst for truth, they demand illusions—the unreal receives precedence over the real—the group is an obedient herd—prestige is a source for domination, however it “is also dependent upon success, and is lost in the event of failure”.

Perhaps human groups cannot develop in a similar manner as does swarm intelligence but the existence of such successful ways of handling complex problems indicates that some critical thinking regarding human group behavior is certainly in order.

Questions for discussion:

Do you think it is possible for humans to significantly improve performance within a group?

Do you think that we can find a way to make group behavior to be smarter?

Sources for ideas and quotes in this OP come from “Swarm Theory”--an article in the July 2007 edition of “National Geographic” and from “Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego” by Freud.

Kilroy_x · 07-3-2007, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coberst

Do you think it is possible for humans to significantly improve performance within a group?

Um. Given all that business in bold, is there a reason why we should want to?

Quote:

Do you think that we can find a way to make group behavior to be smarter?

No. Group behavior of the kind stated is just an increased volume of certain key thought processes required for behavior in general, accompanied by a lowering of quality of behavior.

**Skeleton-GotW** · 07-3-2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coberst

Do you think it is possible for humans to significantly improve performance within a group?

It depends on what you mean by performance... but nonetheless I don't think making ourselves more instinctive and barbarian-like would help anything. Our human achievements have all been things that counter instinct and those sorts of behaviors. We catapulted ourselves to the top of the food chain through inventing things, not through being a brute force. Sure in the beginning we probably needed to work together to survive, but now... I don't think it's very useful at all.

For example... I don't think a bunch of scientists are going to form this magical "group thing" and (without thought or emotion, acting almost unconsciously) solve the mysteries of the universe.

Edit: We already display group behavior when we all come together to... maybe complete a project. Everyone does their part and all, but aside from that... there's nothing new here.

07-3-2007, 08:47 AM	#1
coberst FFR Player Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 256	Swarm Theory & Group Psychology Swarm Theory & Group Psychology Scientists are studying and trying to develop an ability to emulate the actions of animal swarms. The birds and the bees can do it; why cannot humans emulate their behavior to our advantage? The collective behavior of animal swarms displays advantageous collective actions without the guidance of organized leadership. Ants, as individuals, are not clever—as a collective ants, bees, birds, caribou, etc. are amazingly clever—there seems to exist something one might label as swarm intelligence—simple creatures following simple rules equal swarm intelligence. Computer engineers attempt to emulate swarm intelligence to solve complex human problems. Compare animal swarm intelligence with group psychology. What is the nature of the ‘group mind’, i.e. the mental changes such individuals undergo as a result of becoming a group? A bond develops much like cells which constitute a living body—group mind is more of an unconscious than a conscious force—there are motives for action that elude conscious attention—distinctiveness and individuality become group behavior based upon unconscious motives—there develops a sentiment of invincible power, anonymous and irresponsible attitudes--repressions of unconscious forces under normal situations are ignored—conscience which results from social anxiety disappear. Contagion sets in—hypnotic order becomes prevalent—individuals sacrifice personal interest for the group interest. Suggestibility, of which contagion is a symptom, leads to the lose of conscious personality—the individual follows suggestions for actions totally contradictory to person conscience—hypnotic like fascination sets in—will and discernment vanishes—direction is taken from the leader in an hypnotic like manner—the conscious personality disappears. “Moreover, by the mere fact that he forms part of an organized group, a man descends several rungs in the ladder of civilization.” Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian—a creature acting by instinct. “He possesses the spontaneity, the violence, the ferocity, and also the enthusiasm and heroism of primitive beings.” There is a lowering of intellectual ability “pointing to its similarity with the mental life of primitive people and of children…A group is credulous and easily influenced”—the improbable seldom exists—they think in images—feelings are very simple and exaggerated—the group knows neither doubt nor uncertainty—extremes are prevalent, antipathy becomes hate and suspicion becomes certainty. Force is king—force is respected and obeyed without question—kindness is weakness—tradition is triumphant—words have a magical power—supernatural powers are easily accepted—groups never thirst for truth, they demand illusions—the unreal receives precedence over the real—the group is an obedient herd—prestige is a source for domination, however it “is also dependent upon success, and is lost in the event of failure”. Perhaps human groups cannot develop in a similar manner as does swarm intelligence but the existence of such successful ways of handling complex problems indicates that some critical thinking regarding human group behavior is certainly in order. Questions for discussion: Do you think it is possible for humans to significantly improve performance within a group? Do you think that we can find a way to make group behavior to be smarter? Sources for ideas and quotes in this OP come from “Swarm Theory”--an article in the July 2007 edition of “National Geographic” and from “Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego” by Freud.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)