“Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.”
Most people are familiar with the above quote from a famous Apple advert. Reading Normal Sucks by Jonathan Mooney and The Power of Different: The Link Between Disorder and Genius by Gail Saltz I have been reminded how people who don’t fit in have the power to change the world. People with dyslexia become innovative entrepreneurs (e.g. Richard Branson), people with ADHD and ASD develop exciting theories (Einstein) and people with bipolar and schizophrenia create outstanding works of art (Vincent van Gogh).
On the flip side, the majority of people are actually quite conformist. Of course, conformism has certain advantages like regulating social life, but more often than not it serves no other purpose than not being different, like the uniformity of American suburbs illustrates.
I have argued before that a lot of those misfits and creatives have hunter-gatherer minds (intuitive types in Myers-Briggs), whereas the majority of people, in particular, the ones who are conformist have farmer minds (SJ types in Myers-Briggs). Intuitive types also happen to have the highest rates of gifted and high IQ people. Studies have shown that it exactly high IQ people tend not to be conformist: Majority Rules: We Tend To Conform, Unless We Have A High IQ
High IQ people aren’t inherently antisocial or rebels, but they can become rebels when their values are threatened. Sometimes it is about banal things, like traditional music, for which high IQ people often have a distaste. Why? High IQ people tend to be freedom-loving hunter-gatherer types whereas the majority of people are farmer types, who are more likely to conform, because a high degree of conformism was likely necessary when early farming started, whereas hunter-gatherer bands consisted more of independent collaborators.
“[…] when the Spanish began their conquest of South America, one of their earliest settlements was at the site of modern Buenos Aires. The settlement was a colonial failure and soon abandoned because the local hunter-gatherers refused to work for the Spanish, even under extreme duress. When the Spanish ventured farther inland and encountered agriculturalists in Paraguay, they easily subjugated the local people by conquering and replacing the aristocracy […]” (from: William von Hippel The Social Leap)
What was the difference between the hunter-gatherer and agricultural societies the Spanish met? Agricultural societies are hierarchically structured. Conformism is an absolute must in order to avoid hierarchical conflicts. The Paraguayans agriculturalist, therefore, didn’t find it too hard to live under Spanish domination (after some initial resistance). However, the egalitarian hunter-gatherers could never have lived as slaves for the Spanish.
You will find the same pattern over and over again in history - the Native Americans, the Aborigines, the Hadza, who were offered land to farm, they don’t easily integrate into “farmer” societies.
Early farmers, on the other hand, needed both hierarchy and conformism to accomplish the required levels of productivity. Conformism and status-thinking go hand in hand. It’s playing keeping up with the Joneses. Interestingly, out of all companies exactly Apple - who two decades ago used their think different campaign - has become a poster child for this level of conformism and status-thinking.
Comments
Post a Comment