Summary: “Humans are prone to herd because it is always warmer and safer in the middle of the herd. Indeed, our brains are wired to make us social animals. We feel the pain of social exclusion in the same parts of the brain where we feel real physical pain.” –James Montier “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.” –Charles Mackay in Extraordinary Popular Delusions & the Madness of Crowds Wow. Worms everywhere. A sea of worms. A huge can of them. What have I gotten myself into? Before I get into the main topic of what was to be this final chapter of this series (but isn’t), I want to make a few comments about what has transpired with the first two parts. My description of social mood turning negative, and what kinds of things are likely to happen (and, historically have happened) obviously really struck a nerve. Though we’ve had a certain amount of acrimony on this blog from time to time from a certain few people, these posts really amped things up. This has happened, I think, because this topic really hits home–and because we’re in a time of declining social mood, which is affecting you, too. There’s nothing theoretical about it. It would be difficult to not notice the negativity, chaos, anger, fear, and uncertainty in the air. Some are living right in the middle of it. In the space of a very short time we have had a shooting of a Congresswoman and a Federal judge (and several others) in Arizona; union protests in Wisconsin (and several neighboring states); the Japanese earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear problems; the Egyptian situation, the Libyan situation, similar problems in other Middle Eastern countries, a gruesome killing of a family (including small children) by terrorists in the Gaza Strip; just to name a few. We also have economic/debt problems all over the world, rising prices, unemployment, record gold and silver prices…and all the various examples of political acrimony, most of it rather ugly and contentious. In fact, I could go on and on reporting various grim news items (but won’t). I found the different types of responses my description of social mood elicited quite interesting. Some of you are in denial. It’s not happening. The Age of Aquarius is coming. More and more people are becoming enlightened. We’re on the verge of a New World. It’s going to be fantastic. All our needs will be met and everyone will get along. Utopia is nigh. Several of you wanted to nitpicking the details, as if doing that would mean all of this isn’t happening. Well, there may be several “wrong” details in the socionomic hypothesis, especially when you look at the most minor details. Does that invalidate the main point I was making, though? My main point went zooming over the heads of some of you. There are several logical fallacies people use when faced with something they don’t like but don’t have data or information to refute it. One is the Ad homimem attack. Ad hominem means “against the man” or “against the person.” In this fallacy an argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant and generally negative charge (whether true or not) about the person making the argument. Ad hominem attacks are fallacious because the character, circumstances, or actions of a person rarely have any bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. (However, “You don’t know anything about this subject” is not an Ad hominem attack, if true.) Another fallacy is “setting up straw men and knocking them down.” In the Straw Man fallacy the actual argument is ignored and instead the person argues against a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version. Distorting and then attacking the distorted version of a position, however, does nothing to refute the actual argument. Dozens of responses utilized this form of attack. Many p[...]
