this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
96 points (94.4% liked)
Asklemmy
43947 readers
738 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Good response. Though it was a bit wordy.
I know what status means, but I didn't realise what status-seeking behaviour could be referring to, since it was vague. I know you tried to reduce your response to a level that everyone could understand, but that was unnecessary. People have the internet now.
For future reference you could try defining status in a single sentence, which allows people to look it up in a search engine or dictionary without room for confusion/vagueness.
That's not true. You're taking one thought and extending it to try to interpret all of human society with. I've made the same mistake before. Of course, your original thought isn't completely wrong, but you stretched it to almost irrelevant (but not unrelated) levels.
No, I'm afraid I don't. What you call status seeking can be called survival in some cases, enjoyment in some, and a waste of resources in some. Calling it status seeking is a misuse of the term and gross reduction of the behaviour's quirks.
Perhaps a better term would be power-hungry person. But maybe that's not the intent of your thought.
That all may fall apart when you realise your knowledge is biased too much towards a single concept. Or too narrow minded.
Note: No insult intended, no sarcasm inserted.
Would materialism or consumerism, then, be the turn-off? Making more of "possessing" than "being" or "doing" is a real turn-off for me.
And, materialism/consumerism is β truly β promoted everywhere.
True.
The abused want freedom from abusers. The enslaved want freedom from the slavers. The poor want sustenance from the rich. The not-poor want greater quality in their life.
None of that is status seeking, unless you twist the meaning. It's hurtful to call it that.
That's absolutely not true. I'm saying that status-seeking is a part of almost all of our unconscious decision-making processes, not that it's the sole part of our decision-making process. A part != Interpret all with it. Of course there's other parts, like you say, survival.
I can not convey all my knowledge and thoughts in a single comment. Even though I tried to shorten it, you still find too long. The "it's only a part" I found obvious, thus I didn't stretch it, but you would have needed it to be included. You personally didn't need the other parts that you found too long. It's basically impossible to know what you need to talk about when explaining something without a conversation, because we don't know each other's knowledge base. It's even more impossible in a forum-style format, where one comment is read by potentially every human on Earth, each of which have vastly different knowledge bases. What is obvious/superfluous for one is not for someone else.
Do all these things not play together? Isn't having status a way to survive better? Aren't the activities that are enjoyable also the ones that allows us to survive (in a non-modern, ancestral world context in which we evolved)? Isn't having status enjoyable for most?
I feel that you're 70% on the mark but then why is it a turn-off for you, as you said in your original message?
Part of the 30%:
Status seeking behaviour has many justifications i.e. that it helps smoothen human interaction, to say the least. So why is it a turn-off for you?
I don't think it helps "smoothen" interaction at all. Of course it depends on the exact situation, like I already described, if it's about helping other people or not affecting anyone negatively, it's completely fine.
But for one example, an unaware status-seeking behavior I see very often is having an Instagram account and posting pictures of their life, in an attempt to gain followers. This could not affect anyone negatively... but 99% of the time, it is, because they interrupt moments that should be enjoyed by being present within the moment with trying to get the perfect picture to show to other people what amazing moments they are experiencing.
The "unaware" was as much of a part of the turn-off as the "status-seeking", maybe even more so. I think if you're aware of your status-seeking behavior, you're able to find much better ways to apply it than if you're unaware of it.
Okay, but in this case "status" was a basic word while the "it's only a part" was something deeply specific to this conversation. It's not fair to compare the two.