Why do people fear being alone...

so much that they will do anything or compromise (their values or intellect) in order to be a part of some group? I am asking this to see what others think on this topic.

Maybe a hypothetical would help: Would you knowingly go along with something morally wrong if it were the only way to avoid being ostracized from all others or would you stand on principle and accept banishment? I ask this because I have known some stout intellects who have compromised in order to fit in?

It's an evolved instinct that enhances survival.

My personal experience has been that the older I get, the more I could care less what other people think and the more I enjoy being alone.

Spurius Furius wrote

My personal experience has been that the older I get, the more I could care less what other people think and the more I enjoy being alone.

I hear you! In fact I am at a point were only facts mean anything. I am however curious about peoples willingness or lack there of to stand on principle.

baric wrote

It's an evolved instinct that enhances survival.

The word instinct is actually incorrect when talking of brain function regardless of what animal species is being considered. There is the autonomic functions of the nervous system and the cognitive.
We as well as other species have demonstrated the ability to overide fears of mortality in order to achieve things. So it is realy a consious choice.
In the hypothetical if you choose to stand on principle you are banished (though with a clear, healthy conscience) and if you choose to go along to get along you are supposedly rewarded by being allowed to be a part of a group, but only at the expense of your conscience.
Maybe this is too self indulgent for a thread. I have seen a lot of this lately..that is people being confronted with such a choice, and I must admit I am facinated with the consequences for both those who choose principle and those who choose to compromise.

LogicMan wrote

I hear you! In fact I am at a point were only facts mean anything. I am however curious about peoples willingness or lack there of to stand on principle.

The word instinct is actually incorrect when talking of brain function regardless of what animal species is being considered. There is the autonomic functions of the nervous system and the cognitive.
We as well as other species have demonstrated the ability to overide fears of mortality in order to achieve things. So it is realy a consious choice.
In the hypothetical if you choose to stand on principle you are banished (though with a clear, healthy conscience) and if you choose to go along to get along you are supposedly rewarded by being allowed to be a part of a group, but only at the expense of your conscience.
Maybe this is too self indulgent for a thread. I have seen a lot of this lately..that is people being confronted with such a choice, and I must admit I am facinated with the consequences for both those who choose principle and those who choose to compromise.

I would consider a mother wolf having the predisposition to protect her young to be what baric described as an "evolved instinct". Mother wolves that had this predispostion were probably more sucessful in passing their genes down through the ages, and therefore all (or at least most) wolves display this characteristic. I do not think that this behavior is cognitive or is a choice for the wolf.

Spurius Furius wrote

I would consider a mother wolf having the predisposition to protect her young to be what baric described as an "evolved instinct".

That is an excellent analogy for what I meant. I apologize if my choice of wording was unclear.

As a father, I can vouch first-hand for the existence of "evolved instincts". For example, there is no denying the overwhelming instinct you have to protect your children regardless of what your conscious mind is telling you at any given moment.

Spurius Furius wrote

I would consider a mother wolf having the predisposition to protect her young to be what baric described as an "evolved instinct". Mother wolves that had this predispostion were probably more sucessful in passing their genes down through the ages, and therefore all (or at least most) wolves display this characteristic. I do not think that this behavior is cognitive or is a choice for the wolf.

I see the point your making, however most common use for the word instinct is to define it as a built in knowledge which is incorrect. Recent studies of animals in captivity that were not reared in any way by there biological mother were clueless as to what to do when they had their own offspring. Intervention by the handlers was required. This off course places such nurturing behavior in the learned (cognitive) catagory. This is also further backed up by the fact that wild animals who were raised in captivity though only around humans seldom survive went let loose into the wild unless steps are taken to train them through limited exposure in advance.

LogicMan wrote

I see the point your making, however most common use for the word instinct is to define it as a built in knowledge which is incorrect. Recent studies of animals in captivity that were not reared in any way by there biological mother were clueless as to what to do when they had their own offspring. Intervention by the handlers was required. This off course places such nurturing behavior in the learned (cognitive) catagory. This is also further backed up by the fact that wild animals who were raised in captivity though only around humans seldom survive went let loose into the wild unless steps are taken to train them through limited exposure in advance.

And arguably, our ridiculously (by the standard of almost every other species) long childhood pretty much does away with the need for instinctual behaviour. As the geeks are fond of saying: "The only intuitive interface is the nipple. And even that has to be learned."