We ended the last shiur talking about holding on to the โTree of Lifeโ, as a metaphor for ืืืื. Shlomo now looks at G-dโs ืืืื:
ืื ืืณ ืืืืื ืืกื ืืจืฅ; ืืื ื ืฉืืื ืืชืืื ืื
ื ืืืขืชื ืชืืืืืช ื ืืงืขื; ืืฉืืงืื ืืจืขืคื ืืื
In the context of ืกืคืจ ืืฉืื, human ืืืื,โ ืืื ื and ืืขืช are all about the use of our minds to decide the right and good behavior. Here we use the same terms to describe ืืณ. But thatโs not the same thing. For many of ืืณโs attributes, we talk about ืืืืช ืืืจืืื, imitating G-d. But we canโt imitate ืืณโs knowlege; our intellect is by definition limited.
ืฉืื ืชืืืจ ืืืื ืืงืืืฉ ืืจืื ืืื ืืืืข ืื ืื ืฉืืืื ืืงืื ืฉืืืื ืืืข ืฉืื ืืืื ืฆืืืง ืื ืจืฉืข ืื ืื ืืืข. ืื ืืืข ืฉืืื ืืืื ืฆืืืง ืื ืืคืฉืจ ืฉืื ืืืื ืฆืืืง ืืื ืชืืืจ ืฉืืืข ืฉืืืื ืฆืืืง ืืืคืฉืจ ืฉืืืื ืจืฉืข ืืจื ืื ืืืข ืืืืจ ืขื ืืจืื. ืืข ืฉืชืฉืืืช ืฉืืื ืื ืืจืื ืืืจืฅ ืืื ืืจืืื ืื ื ืื ืืืื ืขืงืจืื ืืืืืื ืืืจืจืื ืจืืื ืชืืืืื ืื ืืื ืฆืจืื ืืชื ืืืืข ืืืืืื ืืืืจ ืื ืฉืื ื ืืืืจ. ืืืจ ืืืจื ื ืืคืจืง ืฉื ื ืืืืืืช ืืกืืื ืืชืืจื ืฉืืงืืืฉ ืืจืื ืืื ืืื ื ืืืืข ืืืขื ืฉืืื ืืืฅ ืืื ื ืืื ื ืืื ืฉืื ืืืขืชื ืฉื ืื. ืืื ืืื ืืชืขืื ืฉืื ืืืขืชื ืืื ืืืื ืืขืชื ืฉื ืืื ืืืืื ืืืฉืื ืืืจ ืื ืขื ืืจืื. ืืืฉื ืฉืืื ืื ืืืื ืืืฉืื ืืืืฆื ืืืชืช ืืืืจื ืฉื ืืืจ (ืฉืืืช ืื:ื) ืึผึดื ืึนื ืึดืจึฐืึทื ึดื ืึธืึธืึธื ืึธืึธื ืื ืืื ืื ืืืื ืืืฉืื ืืืืฆื ืืขืชื ืฉื ืืืืจื. ืืื ืฉืื ืืื ืืืจ (ืืฉืขืื ื ื:ื) ืึผึดื ืึนื ืึทืึฐืฉืึฐืืึนืชึทื ืึทืึฐืฉืึฐืืึนืชึตืืึถื.
So when we use the terms ืืืื,โ ืืื ื and ืืขืช about ืืณ, it is a metaphor. ืืืช for ืืณ is very different from ืืืช for human beings, but they are related.
ืืขืื ืืฉ ืื ืืืขืช, ืืฃ ืขื ืคื ืฉืืืื ืขืืฉื ืืฉืคื ืืืช ืืืฉืจ ืืื ืืืฉืคื ืืื ืืืช ืืืื, ืื ืื ืืคืฉืจ ืฉืื ืืืื ืืืื ืืฉืงืจ ืืืฉืคื ืืฉืืื, ืืืคืืื ืืื ืืืช ืืืฉืคื ืืืช ืืืื, ืืืื ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืช ืืืฉืคื ืฉืืืื ืืืื ืืืจ ืืงืืดื, ืจืง ืืืฉืจ ืืื ืืขื ืืกื ืืขืืฉื ืืกื ืฉืื ืืืฉืคื, ืืืืื ืืื ืืืช ืืคืฉืจ ืื ืืขืฉืืช ืืืื ืฉืืืืช ืื, ืืืืจ ืื ืืชืืืจ ืืงืื ืืฆื (ืชืืืื ืคื:ืื) ืึถืกึถื ืึถืึฑืึถืช ื ึดืคึฐืึธึผืฉืืึผ, ืื ืืืืืืช ืืกื ืืคืจื ืืื ืืืช ืืืื ืืืื ืฉืืื ืืืื ืื ืืืช ืืืฉืคื ืืื ืฉืืจ ืืืืืช ืจืง ืืื ืืืช, ืืืคืืื ืืืื ืืืช ืฉืืื ืืืืืืช ืืืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืฉืืืื ืืืจ ืืงืืดื ืืืืื ืืืืช ืืชืืืืก ืื ืืฉื ืืชืืจื ืขืฆืื ืื ืื.
ืืกื ืืืืจ ืืืจื, ืฉืืื ืืืื ืืกืืื. ืืืืช ืืืืจ ืื ืืืจื, ืฉืืื ืฉืงืจืื.
And the point of that relationship is through the Torah:
ืงืืืฉื ืืจืื ืืื ืืกืชืื ืืืืจืืืชื ืืืจื ืขืืื; ืืจ ื ืฉ ืืกืชืื ืื ืืืืจืืืชื ืืืงืืื ืขืืื.
Our imitatio dei in ืืืื is not to pretend to have god-like ืืืื, but that we use our ืืืื to create the universe, Robert Coverโs normative world, the social world in which we live, to be ืืงืืื ืขืืื. The midrash continues:
ืื ืขืฉื ืืงืืืฉ ืืจืื ืืื? ื ืื ืืืช ืืืฉืืืื ืืืจืฅ, ืืื ืืื ืืืชืื (ืื ืืื ื:ืื): ืึฐืชึทืฉืึฐืึตืึฐ ืึฑืึถืช ืึทืจึฐืฆึธืโฆืชืขืื ืืืช ืื ืืืจืฅ! ืืื ืืื ืืืชืื (ืชืืืื ืคื:ืื): ืึฑืึถืช ืึตืึถืจึถืฅ ืชึผึดืฆึฐืึธื.
So the word ืืืช means something different from the divine ืืืช, and so there is a different meaning for the intelligence to understand that ืืืช, but ืืณ gives us the gift to determine our ืืืช.
Shlomo advises us to keep that in mind.
ืื ืื ื ืื ืืืื ืืขืื ืื; ื ืฆืจ ืชืฉืื ืืืืืื
ืื ืืืืื ืืืื ืื ืคืฉื; ืืื ืืืจืืจืชืืื
ืื ืื ืชืื ืืืื ืืจืื; ืืจืืื ืื ืชืืืฃื
ืื ืื ืชืฉืื ืื ืชืคืื; ืืฉืืืช ืืขืจืื ืฉื ืชืื
ืื ืื ืชืืจื ืืคืื ืคืชืื; ืืืฉืืช ืจืฉืขืื ืื ืชืืื
ืื ืื ืืณ ืืืื ืืืกืื; ืืฉืืจ ืจืืื ืืืืื
We defined ืชืฉืื in The Widening Gyre as Torah considered as the source of reality:
ืชืืฉืื: ืืชืืจื ื ืงืจืืช ืชืืฉืื, ืืืฉืื ืืฉ.
So when Shlomo advises us ืื ืชืื ืืืื ืืจืื when we keep ืืณ's creation in mind, it could be a reference to the way that contemplating the vastness of creation inspires our awe.
ืืืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืืืืืชื ืืืจืืชื? ืืฉืขื ืฉืืชืืื ื ืืืื ืืืขืฉืื ืืืจืืืื ืื ืคืืืื ืืืืืืื ืืืจืื ืืื ืืืืชื ืฉืืื ืื ืขืจื ืืื ืงืฅ ืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืฉืื ืืืคืืจ ืืืชืืื ืชืืื ืืืืื ืืืืข ืืฉื ืืืืื. ืืื ืฉืืืจ ืืื (ืชืืืืื ืื:ื) ืฆึธืึฐืึธื ื ึทืคึฐืฉืึดื ืึตืืึนืงึดืื ืึฐืึตึพื ืึธื. ืืืฉืืืฉื ืืืืจืื ืืืื ืขืฆืื ืืื ืืื ื ืจืชืข ืืืืืจืื ืืืคืื ืืืืืข ืฉืืื ืืจืื ืงืื ื ืฉืคืื ืืคืื ืขืืืืช ืืืขืช ืงืื ืืขืืื ืืคื ื ืชืืื ืืขืืช. ืืื ืฉืืืจ ืืื (ืชืืืืื ื:ื) ืึผึดื ืึถืจึฐืึถื ืฉืึธืึถืืึธ ืึทืขึฒืฉืึตื ืึถืฆึฐืึผึฐืขึนืชึถืืึธโฆ(ืชืืืืื ื:ื) ืึธื ืึฑื ืึนืฉื ืึผึดื ืชึดืึฐืึผึฐืจึถื ึผืึผ. ืืืคื ืืืืจืื ืืืื ืื ื ืืืืจ ืืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืขืฉื ืจืืื ืืขืืืืื ืืื ืฉืืืื ืคืชื ืืืืื ืืืื ืืช ืืฉื. ืืื ืฉืืืจื ืืืืื ืืขื ืื ืืืื ืฉืืชืื ืื ืืชื ืืืืจ ืืช ืื ืฉืืืจ ืืืื ืืขืืื.
And ืกืคืจ ืืฉืื emphasizes the importance of ืืจืืช ืืณ to ethics (ืืฉืื ื:ื):โ ืืจืืช ืืณ ืจืืฉืืช ืืขืช. But I think that here Shlomo means something different.
ื ืฆืจ ืชืฉืื ืืืืื: Keep in mind ืืณ's ืืืื,โ ืืื ื and ืืขืช in the creation of the world. Use that as your ืืืื, maintain your mindfulness, and that will guide you how to act: do the things that preserve the world that ืืณ created.
Have the faith that that ืจืฉืขืื will be punished, destroyed in the end.
ื ืืืฉ ืืขืจ ืื ืืืข; ืืืกืื ืื ืืืื ืืช ืืืชื ื ืืคืจื ืจืฉืขืื ืืื ืขืฉื ืืืฆืืฆื ืื ืคืขืื ืืื; ืืืฉืืื ืขืื ืขืื
But you, who are acting in good faith, can be reassured. ืืณ ืืืื ืืืกืื; ืืฉืืจ ืจืืื ืืืื, even in our foolishness. You are not going to get everything right; you are only human. In ืืฉืื,โ ืืกืื is a particular kind of fool: one with the self-assurance to not need to think any more. We all are like that, so we need to keep ืืณ's omniscience in mind, and then we will remember that we have primitive monkey brains, and that will ืฉืืจ ืจืืื ืืืื.
Now Shlomo tells us what the fundamental heuristic is. Mishleiโs mussar message number five: Tit for tat.
ืื ืื ืชืื ืข ืืื ืืืขืืื ืืืืืช ืืื ืืื ืืขืฉืืชื
ืื ืื ืชืืืจ ืืจืขื ืื ืืฉืื ืืืืจ ืืชื; ืืืฉ ืืชืื
ืื ืื ืชืืจืฉ ืขื ืจืขื ืจืขื; ืืืื ืืืฉื ืืืื ืืชืื
ื ืื ืชืจืื ืขื ืืื ืื ื ืื ืื ืืืื ืจืขืื
The advice is not ืื ืชืจืื ืขื ืืื ever; that is a recipe for inviting abuse. ืื ืชืจืื ืขื ืืื ืื ื ืื ืื ืืืื ืจืขื means that being nice has to be your default, but be prepared to punish wrongdoers.
ืื ืขื ืืกืื ืชืชืืกื; ืขื ืืืจ ืชืืื ืชืชืืื ืื ืขื ื ืืจ ืชืชืืจืจ; ืืขื ืขืงืฉ ืชืชืคืชืื
Thatโs not just a moral decision, but it can be demonstrated that it is the best strategy for the long-term survival of society. That will take some exposition.
Life isnโt a zero-sum game. Ideally, we can both win. Or, we could both lose. Unfortunately, if I help you and you take advantage of me without helping in return, I end up losing. So both of us, trying to do the best we can, refuse to cooperate and so we both lose. This is called โThe Prisonerโs Dilemmaโ, which is the basis for computer simulations of competition.
The Prisonerโs Dilemma game was first proposed by Merrill Flood in 1951. It was formalized and defined by Albert W. Tucker. The name refers to the following hypothetical situation:
Two criminals are captured by the police. The police suspect that they are responsible for a murder, but do not have enough evidence to prove it in court, though they are able to convict them of a lesser charge (carrying a concealed weapon, for example). The prisoners are put in separate cells with no way to communicate with one another and each is offered to confess.
If neither prisoner confesses, both will be convicted of the lesser offense and sentenced to a year in prison. If both confess to murder, both will be sentenced to 5 years. If, however, one prisoner confesses while the other does not, then the prisoner who confessed will be granted immunity while the prisoner who did not confess will go to jail for 20 years.
What should each prisoner do?
If the prisoners could communicate, the best strategy is to not confess (call that โcooperationโ). But each prisoner thinks, โIf I donโt confess, and the other guy does, I go to jail for 20 years. If I do confess, and he does, that goes down to 5 years.โ His logic leads him to confess (call that โdefectingโ, doing something that hurts the other). So both end up doing the worst thing for themselves. Thereโs no good strategy for this game.
See https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2010-06-05
But thereโs another downside to betraying the other: we are going to keep interacting. What I do now will influence what everyone else does to me later. The extended prisonerโs dilemma is a better model for society, and there is a winning strategy for that: cooperate unless the other side betrays.
In 1980, Robert Axelrod, professor of political science at the University of Michigan, held a tournament of various strategies for the prisonerโs dilemma. He invited a number of well-known game theorists to submit strategies to be run by computers. In the tournament, programs played games against each other and themselves repeatedly. Each strategy specified whether to cooperate or defect based on the previous moves of both the strategy and its opponent.
โฆThe winner of Axelrodโs tournament was the TIT FOR TAT strategy. The strategy cooperates on the first move, and then does whatever its opponent has done on the previous move.
We assume that, in a world ruled by natural selection, selfishness pays. So why cooperate? In The Evolution of Cooperation, political scientist Robert Axelrod seeks to answer this question. In 1980, he organized the famed Computer Prisoners Dilemma Tournament, which sought to find the optimal strategy for survival in a particular game. Over and over, the simplest strategy, a cooperative program called Tit for Tat, shut out the competition. In other words, cooperation, not unfettered competition, turns out to be our best chance for survival.
Which all adds up to a nice way of saying that, in the world that ืืณ created, including the rules of mathematics, ืื ืชืืจืฉ ืขื ืจืขื ืจืขื; ืืืื ืืืฉื ืืืื ืืชื is not just the law; itโs a good idea.
Shlomo ends the perek with the reassurance that nice guys donโt finish last.
ืื ืื ืชืงื ื ืืืืฉ ืืืก; ืืื ืชืืืจ ืืื ืืจืืืื
ืื ืื ืชืืขืืช ืืณ ื ืืื; ืืืช ืืฉืจืื ืกืืืื
ืื ืืืจืช ืืณ ืืืืช ืจืฉืข; ืื ืื ืฆืืืงืื ืืืจืื
ืื ืื ืืืฆืื ืืื ืืืืฅ; ืืืขื ืืื ืืชื ืืื
ืื ืืืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื; ืืืกืืืื ืืจืื ืงืืืื
The reward for the ืืืืื is ืืืื, which is a little odd, because we usually think of ืืืื as a bad thing.
ืจืื ืืืขืืจ ืืงืคืจ ืืืืจ: ืืงื ืื ืืืชืืื ืืืืืื, ืืืฆืืืื ืืช ืืืื ืื ืืขืืื.
We have a ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืืืื. The Maharal, explaining why ืืงื ืื ืืืชืืื ืืืืืื destroy a personโs world, says each of these relate to an aspect of our selves:
ืืข ืื ืื ืืืื ืฉืืื ืืขื ืื, ืืฉ ืื ื ืคืฉ. ืืื ืคืฉ ืืืืช ืืฉ ืื ืืืืช ืืืืืงืืชโฆืืืชื ืืจืืืดื ืืดื ืืืงืืืช ืืกืืชื ืืืืช ืฉืฉื ืจืืฉ ืืจืืคืืื ืืชืืืช ืกืคืจื ืฉืื ืคืฉืืช ืฉืืฉ; ืืืขืืช, ืืืื ืืช, ื ืคืฉืืชโฆ
There are many names for this tripartite โlife forceโ: ืฆืืื-ืื-ืืืืจ or ื ืคืฉ-ืจืื-ื ืฉืื; for Plato, epithymetikon (appetite)-thymoeides (emotion)-logistikon (reasoning).
ืืืืจ ืขื ืื ืืณ ืืืืช ืืื; ืื ืืืขื, ืืื ืืื ืฉืืงืื ืืืื ื ืฉืืืื ื ืืืืโฆืืืื ืื ืื ืืชืืืโฆ
ืืื ืืฉื ื ืืื ืื ืืืืื ื, ืฉืืื ื ืืืืืช, ืืขื ืืื ืื ืื ืืืื ืืื ืืชื ืืขืข ืืืงืื ืืืงืื, ืืืื ื ืืชืืืฉโฆืืงื ืืโฆ
ืืืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืฉืืืโฆืื ืืืืื ืืื ืืืจ ืจืืื ื, ืืืื ื ืืืจ ืืฉืื, ืืืื ืืืืื ืจืืื ืื ืืฉืืื.
All the different aspects of what we call ืืฆืจ ืืจืข come from different aspects of our selves. ืืืื is the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข that comes from our intelligence, specifically our ability to talk, to communicate, to relate to others. Itโs often translated as โhonorโ but itโs about how we fit into society, what in modern parlance is called โstatusโ. We are social primates, and what matters to us is where we fall in the hierarchy of our hominid troop.
Much of a chimpanzeeโs life, especially male chimpanzees, is dedicated to climbing up or being knocked down the chimpanzee social ladderโฆThose on top need to fight to stay at the top, and those at the bottom need to find a way to improve their lot if they want a chance at fathering offspring and access to the best resources.
We play for status, if only subtly, with every social interaction, every contribution we make to work, love or family life and every internet post. We play with how we dress, how we speak and what we believe. Life is not a journey towards a perfect destination. Itโs a game that never ends. And itโs the very worst of us.
They did a test where they had baboons in a laboratory, and these unlucky/lucky baboons were given a really unhealthy diet of junk food to live on for a while. They developed unhealthy bodies and high levels of atherosclerotic plaque. And the researchers foundโฆthat the baboons were all equally unhealthy, but it was the baboons towards the bottom of the hierarchy that were more likely to fall ill as a result of their bad diets. And then, crucially, the researchers conspired to rearrange the hierarchy of the baboon troop, and they found that the health outcomes changed in lockstep with the rearrangement of the hierarchy. The new top baboons were suddenly healthier and had better outcomes than boons beneath them.
So status sinks down to our physical health and our happiness. One of the major studies that I quote in the book looked at 60,000 people across 123 countries, and they found that peopleโs well-being consistently depended upon the degree to which they felt respected by other people. Thatโs status, and it was the strongest predictor of long-term positive or negative feelings. Status is more important to peopleโs happiness than family or money. And they found this across gender, culture, age, personality. Wherever they looked, all around the world, they found that this was true.
Men are really violent compared to womenโฆitโs very much tied to humiliation, the humiliation of the familyโฆWomen have got their dominance techniquesโostracization, bullying, group attacks on other peopleโthe kind we see on social media, for example. [It is all a] way of achieving status through dominance.
So it sounds like ืืืื is a bad thing, which is what the mishna said, but here in ืกืคืจ ืืฉืื we have ืืืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื. The truth is that ืืฆืจ ืืจืข shouldnโt be considered not โevilโ per se; it represents the urges of a person to meet their own needs as opposed to a higher purpose. But (ืืฉื ื ืืืืช ื:ืื)โ ืื ืืื ืื ื ืื, ืื ืื? I do have to pay attention to my own survival and flourishing.
(ืืจืืฉืืช ื:ืื) ืึฐืึดื ึผึตื ืืึนื ืึฐืึนื, ืื ืืฆืจ ืจืข. ืืื ืืฆืจ ืืจืข ืืื ืืื, ืืชืืื? ืืื ืฉืืืืื ืืฆืจ ืืจืข ืื ืื ื ืืื ืืืช, ืืื ื ืฉื ืืฉื, ืืื ืืืืื, ืืื ื ืฉื ืื ืชื.
We have examples of how critical the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข is, in the gemara that talks about the end of prophecy:
(ื ืืืื ื:ื) ืึทืึผึดืฆึฐืขึฒืงืึผ ืึถื ืืณ ืึฑืึนืงึดืื ืึผึฐืงืึนื ืึผึธืืึนื. ืืื ืืืืจ? ืืืจ ืจื, ืืืืชืืื ืจืื ืืืื ื: ืืืื ืืืื! ืืืื ื ืืื ืืืืจืืื ืืืงืืฉื ืืงืืื ืืืืืืื ืืงืืืื ืื ืืืืืื ืฆืืืงื ืืืืืื ืื ืืืฉืจืื ืืืจืขืืื, ืืขืืืื ืืจืงื ืืื ื. ืืืื ืืืืชืื ืื ืืื ืืงืืืื ืืื ืืืจื? ืื ืืืื ืืขืื ื, ืืื ืืืจืื ืืขืื ื!
ื ืคื ืืื ืคืืชืงื ืืจืงืืขื, ืืืื ืืชื ืื โืืืชโ. ืืืจ ืจื ืื ืื ื: ืฉืืข ืืื ื ืืืชืื ืฉื ืืงืืืฉ ืืจืื ืืื ืดืืืชืด.
ืืืชืืื ืืชืขื ืืชื ืชืืชื ืืืืื ืืชืืชื ืืืืืืชื, ืืกืจืืื ื ืืืืืื. ื ืคืง ืืชื ืื ืืืจืื ืื ืืจื ืืืืช ืงืืฉื ืืงืืฉืื, ืืืจ ืืื ื ืืื ืืืฉืจืื: ืืืื ื ืืฆืจื ืืขืืืื ืืจื, ืฉื ืืืจ (ืืืจืื ื:ื): ืึทืึผึนืืึถืจ ืึนืืช ืึธืจึดืฉืึฐืขึธืโฆืึทืึผึทืฉืึฐืึตืึฐ ืึนืชึธืึผ ืึถื ืชึผืึนืึฐ ืึธืึตืืคึธื ืึทืึผึทืฉืึฐืึตืึฐ ืึถืช ืึถืึถื ืึธืขืึนืคึถืจึถืช ืึถืึพืคึผึดืืึธ.
ืืืจื: ืืืืื ืืขืช ืจืฆืื ืืื, ื ืืขื ืจืืื ืืืฆืจื ืืขืืืจื. ืืขื ืจืืื ืืืืกืจ ืืืืืืื. ืืืจ ืืื: ืืื, ืืื ืงืืืืชื ืืื ืืืืื, ืืื ืขืืื. ืืืฉืืื ืชืืชื ืืืื, ืืืขื ืืืขืชื ืืช ืืืื ืืื ืืจืฅ ืืฉืจืื ืืื ืืฉืชืื.
ืกืืจ ืขืืื ืคืจืง ื:ื: ืขื ืืื ืืื ืื ืืืืื. ืคืืจืืฉ: ืืฉืืจืื ืืช ืืืฆืจ ืืจืข ืืืื ืื ืืืื; ืขืืดื ืืืจืดื. ืืืื ืืฆืจื ืืขืืืื ืืจื ืืืืืืจ ืืืืื.
ืืืืขืชื ืืืื ืชื ืื ืืืจื ืืคืกืืง ืืืจืื (ืื:ื) ืึฐืึธืึธื ืึทืึผืึนื ืึทืืึผื ื ึฐืึปื ืืณ ืฆึฐืึธืืึนึพืช ืึทืึฐืจึดืืช ืึถืช ืฉึฐืืืึนืช ืึธืขึฒืฆึทืึดึผืื ืึดื ืึธืึธืจึถืฅ ืึฐืึนื ืึดืึธึผืึฐืจืึผ ืขืึนื; ืึฐืึทื ืึถืช ืึทื ึฐึผืึดืืึดืื ืึฐืึถืช ืจืึผืึท ืึทืึปึผืึฐืึธื ืึทืขึฒืึดืืจ ืึดื ืึธืึธืจึถืฅโฆืืขื ืื ืืืื ืืืจืดื, ืืืืดืง, ืื ืืื ืืืื ืช ืืคืกืืง ืขื ื ืืืืช ืืืชโฆืืื ืขื ืื ืจืื ืฆืจืื ืืืืืจ ืืืืฉืื, ืืืืืดื.
โฆืจืื ืื ืฉื ืื ืกืช ืืืืืื ืฆืืจื ืืืฉืชืื ืืื ืืืืชืืื ืืจืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืฉืจืื ืืช ืืฆืจ ืืจืข ืฉื ืขืืืื ืืจื, ืฉืื ืจืื ืกืืืช ืืืืจืื. ืืืื ืืืื ืื ืืืืชืจ ืชืืืจืช ืื ืขื ืืฉืืจ ืืืืื ืืืจืื ืืืฆืืืืช ืืฆืจ ืืื ืืืืืืฉื. ืืืฆืื ื ืืืืจื ืจืณ ืฆืืืง ืืืื ืืฆืดื, ืฉืื ืขืื ืฉืืื ืงืืื ืืฆืืดืจ ืฉื ืขืืืื ืืจื, ืืืชื ืื ืืื ืื ืืืื ืืืื ื ืกืื ืืืืืื ืืืฉืจืื.
In other words, it is the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืขืืืื ืืจื that makes ื ืืืื possible. The ืื ืฉื ืื ืกืช ืืืืืื decided ืื ืืืื ืืขืื ื, ืืื ืืืจืื ืืขืื ื, and we lost an important part of our world. It is the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืชืืื that makes reproduction possible. And just like we need the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืชืืื, we need the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืืืื. Itโs what makes us want to interact with others; those without that ืืฆืจ ืืจืข are called sociopaths.
Humans are social creatures.
We crave money and power. We pursue physical safety and physical pleasures. We have ideals for which some of us have, on occasion, proven willing to die. But one of the most fundamental drives we haveโone that, in many circumstances, trumps all these othersโis the need for social connection and social approval.
The reasons for this go deep. For much of our history as a species, individuals who were cast out from their group were far more likely to die. Even today, many people find social humiliation as hard to bear as physical pain. Solitary confinement is, for good reason, considered a form of torture. In the history of warfare, many more people have been willing to die by marching in lockstep with their comrades than to save themselves by deserting from the group.
But status is a funny thing. You canโt directly work for it.
ืื ืืืืืจ ืขื ืืืืืื, ืืืืื ืืืจืืช ืืื ื; ืืื ืืืืจื ืื ืืืืืื, ืืืืื ืืืืจืช ืืืจืื.
ืื ืืจืืืฃ ืืืจ ืืืืื, ืืืืื ืืืจื ืืื ื; ืืื ืืืืจื ืื ืืืืื, ืืืืื ืจืืืฃ ืืืจืื.
One of the most fundamental [silver linings of status games] is that the human animal has evolved an automatic system of reward for people who are valuable. So when we are virtuous, when weโre selfless, when we do something good, people automatically go, โOh, thatโs really good. You did a great thing,โ and they give us a bit of status. Itโs even internal. When we give money to charity or do something thatโs good, we feel better about ourselves. We reward ourselves with status internally. No other animal has this system of rewards for virtuous behavior.
So the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข for ืืืื is an important part of what allows the social universe to survive. Just like ืฉืืืืื ืืฆืจ ืืจืข [ืืชืืื]โฆืื ื ืฉื [ืืื] ืืฉื, ืืื ืืืืื, and ืืืืื ืืฆืจ ืืจืข [ืืงื ืื] ืื ืื ื ืืื ืืืชโฆืืื ื ืฉื ืื ืชื, so too the ืืฆืจ ืืจืข ืืืืื is what allows the structure of an organized society to flourish, to avoid Hobbesโs โlife in the state of nature..nasty, brutish and shortโ. The key is to realize that you canโt (or at least shouldnโt) achieve status by dominating others; you have to be the sort of person that others grant status to, and ืืืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื.