Left, Right, Left, Right: Muscular Bonding and the Hive Trigger

reply to post by SplitInfinity


You know bro when someone is trying so hard to impress there alpha qualities upon the general consensus there is usually a girl looking on somewhere. May I suggest you try a different approach, what you need is some tiger blood.

This guy has it, Winning.

I will not believe that if I do something then I have to follow a certain path because it was written for normal people. People who aren't special. People who don't have tiger blood and Adonis DNA.
...Charlie Sheen.

Ya your coming up a bit like that bro. Just trying to help you.

reply to post by galadofwarthethird

Ahhh...Charlie! LOL! Too Much! LOL! Charie is an ACTOR who began to believe that his actions had effect that went beyond entertainment. Charlie began to believe that the roles that he played were real to the extent of effecting any meaningful change or had any benefit otherthan making people laugh or allowing people a temorary escape from their actual Lives Reality.

I was talking about a method of effecting change that if used properly...has real beneficial results as well as discussing on this Topic the difference between being a True Alpha and thinking you are.
Split Infinity

Originally posted by Eidolon23


Rule number #1 is for chumps. Shine as brightly as you can, regardless of your master's radiance.

Nicolas Fouquet, marquis de Belle-Île, vicomte de Melun et Vaux (January 27, 1615 – March 23, 1680) was the Superintendent of Finances in France from 1653 until 1661 under King Louis XIV. He fell out of favor with the young king, probably because of his extravagant displays of wealth, and the king had him imprisoned from 1661 until his death in 1680.

The Master took Offence........

reply to post by sonnny1




Touche.

reply to post by Eidolon23


Have you ever heard of the idea,the Great Man Theory ?

The Great Man Theory was a popular 19th century idea according to which history can be largely explained by the impact of "great men", or heroes: highly influential individuals who, due to either their personal charisma, intelligence, wisdom, or Machiavellianism utilized their power in a way that had a decisive historical impact. The theory was popularized in the 1840s by Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle, and in 1860 Herbert Spencer formulated a counter-argument that has remained influential throughout the 20th century to the present; Spencer said that such great men are the products of their societies, and that their actions would be impossible without the social conditions built before their lifetimes.

Untimely Meditations, Nietzsche writes that: "...the goal of humanity lies in its highest specimens

In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard writes that: "...to be able to fall down in such a way that the same second it looks as if one were standing and walking, to transform the leap of life into a walk, absolutely to express the sublime and the pedestrian -- that only these knights of faith can do -- this is the one and only prodigy."

And the Con.....

"You must admit that the genesis of a great man depends on the long series of complex influences which has produced the race in which he appears, and the social state into which that race has slowly grown.... Before he can remake his society, his society must make him." —Herbert Spencer, The Study of Sociology

Great Man theory

Its a interesting theory.........

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Ahhh...Charlie! LOL! Too Much! LOL! Charie is an ACTOR who began to believe that his actions had effect that went beyond entertainment.

I was talking about a method of effecting change that if used properly...has real beneficial results as well as discussing on this Topic the difference between being a True Alpha and thinking you are. Split Infinity

Everybody is the center of there own universe.

reply to post by sonnny1


Boy Howdy!

Taking it back beyond the queasy Germans begrudgingly acknowledging the necessity of the Great Man, and the way the Group checks his power in smaller societies:

tapera.info...

reply to post by Eidolon23




I so want to be a Polynesian Chief...........

reply to post by wasaka


Wow, thanks for sharing. That was personal and also interesting information.

I think we can learn a lot from the animal / insect world. Really, they seem more human than we are because many people today have traded their instincts for the 'authority' of everyone around them. We must get back in touch with what works if we will thrive.

Originally posted by Jakes51
I look back on history, and all the instances of bad things happening as a result of what you brought up in your thread. I think of lynch mobs, soldiers being used as cannon fodder, people indoctrinated to perform some unspeakable acts, and so on so forth. Apparently, the cons far outweigh the pros by my estimation. Historically speaking of course. In a military sense, synchronicity serves its purpose, but applied to the general population it usually does more harm than good. Just my opinion.

Another example, which if one disregards the eventual outcome, does demonstrate some of the possible positives in the social context, Nazi Germany.

Pay particular attention to the second clip in context with the OP...

Hitler Youth



League of German Girls



What this achieved was incredible social cohesion, and unification towards a common goal. The result was improved economic performance, which, for a time at least, was the envy of the world. However it was also based upon an absolute belief and trust in leadership, and based on rewarding conforming behaviour. And it was also highly dependent on 'sameness', much in the same way as insect life is, and Spartan life was. Just as the Spartans exposed 'weak' individuals, insects consume them, the Nazis had more forceful tactics, and gas vans. Either way, the result is the same, and homogeny is created, individuality is sacrificed to the expense of the group. In the short term this is fine, in the long term, without 'difference', you lack, as a group, the flexibility required for survival. Insect colonies frequently perish by the introduction of even minor changes, or if the leadership is in some way impaired, such as we are finding with bee colony crashes as a comparison to Hitler's Germany, one screwy leader will send a whole nation to it's destruction. But there are ways in which this 'function' can be applied to inclusion, given the fact that we can use it more fundamentally to over-ride instinctiveness, particularly our more xenophobic tendencies.

Where previous models have failed is that they are usually based upon 'collective narcissim' or more commonly, 'ethnocentric' behaviouralisms. Do away with such focal points and one can create a more accepting and inclusive model which allows for a more varied form of cohesion. A previous poster mentions M Scott Peck, in his book The Different Drum, he details how to create 'true communities' and how they can help us move towards peace. The trick here is to accept that we are different, and yet share certain needs and concerns. Of particular interest is his discussion on how, while people will happily discuss spiritual matters, because they feel they can do something about that, but are uncomfortable discussing the 'arms race' because it makes them feel futile. This is, primarily why such subjects are avoided, when this is the very element of our lives that requires cohesion to overcome. No parliamentary or presidential race will broach the subject because under the laws of persausion, this will create a negative vibe, and in practice, less votes. We feel so powerless that we doubt anyone else can have that power, and we won't back such claims. So, if you think about it, using such positive reinforcement, to help us deal with such an issue, as muscular bonding, we could overcome this psychological slump. For example...



We know enough about group dynamics and social psychology to be able to introduce such a change, and we have learnt enough about the dynamics of inclusion to be able to work towards a common goal. And we have a whole plethora of mistakes to know what not to do too.

Insects cannot learn, we can. We don't need to conform to a externalised ideal in order to achieve cohesion, as Peck brilliantly demonstrates, we just need to understand that we can, if we combine, make a difference.

I agree with the op. I have seen it with my own eyes.

When I used to train regularly in martial arts we would always put someone with the best rhythm in front of class to direct the learning students in new Kata forms. Often the students would pick up the rhythm almost instantly and would be full of spunk. If you would have them train alone they would get tired sooner.

I also noticed once in Hypnosis class when we were observing the hypnotizing effect of gospel music on people, that when I would tap my feet to the music, the other students would pick up on it with their peripheral vision and do it as well. I would stop and they would as well. I had the entire three rows behind me tapping their feet to random videos of music and crazed bible thumpers. It was allot of fun since I never reveled it to them and did it often. I had half my hypnosis class waiting for my cue to begin seat dancing.....hypnotized....lol.

Originally posted by Biliverdin
We know enough about group dynamics and social psychology to be able to introduce such a change, and we have learnt enough about the dynamics of inclusion to be able to work towards a common goal. And we have a whole plethora of mistakes to know what not to do too.

Insects cannot learn, we can. We don't need to conform to a externalised ideal in order to achieve cohesion, as Peck brilliantly demonstrates, we just need to understand that we can, if we combine, make a difference.

Oh, yes. Yes, precisely that.

Thank you so much.

reply to post by Biliverdin

You know Biliverdin, you don't get enough stars in your posts most times, not only are you knowledgeable on the best way to cook zombie brains come the Zombie Apocalypse, and what cooking items to bring along. But your also knowledgeable about a great many other things as well.

One can always argue with pretty much all you said, but it wont be me since I don't feel like it. And only a fool will deny that there isn't a group dynamic in all living things. After all there is not one thing on this planet this is not in some way or somehow related to a group and its dynamics, not insects, not plants, not fungi, not even elements and there atoms. And definitely not men and women, and when was the last time you saw the one and only thing of its kind? The answer so far has been never, were there is one there is bound to be another of its kind somewhere.

But there are element's of danger in this group system of life, one being that one sacrifices individuality for the completeness and safety that the whole offers, and even for the whole when need arises. And that right there has lead to a whole bunch of problems throughout history were in the end its groups at odds with other groups. And another problem that has shown to time and time again arise in this dynamic is, that in its extremities, it has so far lead to extremities. To much indoctrination and blind believe and it leads off the right side of the cliff, to much self individuality in times of trial and that to leads off the left side of the cliff. But there is a way to find a medium in all things, because there must be or else life would not exist...period.

But were has the middle road ever taken it?

As only the extremities are generally documented in histories its seems that the middle roads of history are never quite known, but one thing is known. The extremities are documented more oft then naught because they were more often then not failures. Were as those that worked and succeed are not thought of much once there time has passed, in fact some are so successful that they become the norm, and some even instinct. And so there just not thought about much, if at all. But if one can look back into history without the perspectives that have been ingrained in us today and over time, one would see a clearer picture, a more surprising picture of things.

But ingraining instincts even in group dynamics has its purpose.

Not unlike a martial artists or fighter who day in day out practices certain drills and punch combinations and feet placements and movements, at first they are always thinking and judging this and that and form is always on there mind, but after years and years of constant practice and experience. It becomes natural instinct, and there mind does not question it, in fact its just a normal reaction and instinct.

And in a fight be it boxing match or even a no holds bared fight, they do no long think think "oh in this situation I'll do this and this" Because when that situation arises that is what there body and mind will do without even thinking about it, giving them an edge over those not ingrained in that specific moment dynamic. And in some sports were defeat is mere seconds away, thinking about things in the heat and confusion of the moment, well one second spent contradicting or second questing things usually leads to defeat. Not always so, but more often then not it does. And the same can be said of team based sports, were the whole must act in unison and were it is usually the subtle things that wins them the day and the game.

Now before I go off on a rant, ya in a way we are ants.

More complicated ants to be sure, but in some things humans need to march to the same beat to achieve things, the group dynamic has lead to many things throughout history and even today, all the while it never quite stayed on one same rhythm and the one same march of the beat. And that is a big part of what has separated us from the other animals on this planet, in that we can change our tune even when things have been so ingrained in us for millennium and even eons so much so that we call some things become instincts, and we can change our instinct and more importantly we can change our instincts willingly and knowingly.

And what is a majority of instinct but that which at one time was extremely successful. But what was successful in the past does not mean it will always be so, and things has proven time after time that the only constant is change.

A funny thing about ants. As Achilles would say, the Myrmidons march to one heart beat.

Rammstien Links 2 3 4, paints a dynamic picture of the group dynamic thing.
And of myrmidons.

And the English translation of the lyrics of the song.

One can break
One can speak
One can steal hearts
One heart torments one heart

They want my heart at the right spot
Yet I look over then below, away
There it strikes to the left

Hearts can sing
A heart can burst
Hearts can be pure
A heart can be stone

They want my heart at the right spot
Yet I look over then below, away
There it strikes to the left two, three, four

One can ask a heart
To carry a child under
One can give it away
Think with the heart

They want my heart at the right spot
Yet I look over then below, away
There it strinkes in the left breast
Neither barely knew it

To the left two, three, four

reply to post by galadofwarthethird


Trust me on this one galad, it doesn't entirely sit comfortably with me either. If there is one subject that I know inside and out, backwards and forewards, it is Nazi Germany, and everything that the OP proposes screams to me 'run away'. Under that regime I would have been carted off and euthanised long before even the Jews were given their ticket, so I have absolutely no illusions as to the negative side of group think, and, in many ways, I disagree with the OP, however, nor I am a fan of throwing out the baby with the bath water.

The Nazis, any number of cults, militaries in general, have abused the inherent ability we have to connect through movement, and perhaps more particularly through song and music. They took what already existed, twisted it, and used it for their gain. What is to stop us from taking it back?

We are basically driven by tribalistic instincts, we cannot operate with large numbers or groups of people, as I recall the maximum the brain can cope with is 150 contacts, for some us, myself included, that number is significantly less, and therefore, I, we, rely on facilitators, who smooth our passage through life. In tribal days, and even in village life, there were always those that lived on the periphery for most or part of the year, and yet, at times of need and necessity they were able to come together with the wider group and join in the work and the festivities that followed. The bond, therefore, was maintained by working and later dancing together, in this way great things could be achieved, and more importantly the burden of the few was borne by the collective in the knowledge that all would benefit.

We now live in a society where those that were accepted as living on the periphery are viewed with suspicion, and excluded. Society is too big for those people to cope with, and those that would normally facilitate are too busy struggling to cope themselves, because none of us can actually cope with more than 150 contacts (or thereabouts). There is, in most cities, very little cohesion, and therefore, even amongst neighbours, we find that people struggle to form the bonds required to survive, and therefore live, day to day, with sensory overload, which rather than heighten our instincts, causes them to short circuit leaving us distrustful of everyone, which further prevents social cohesion.

We don't need to be ants, in fact ants are the worst things that we humans could be, ants are what I describe above, constantly on the verge of beligerence, should 'difference' be encountered. This is what is used against us, these are the buttons that are constantly pushed that keep us retreating back into our nest and padding it with 'things'. Things have replaced social cohesion.

So, I am not so much in favour of synchronised muscular bonding, as accepting that it fulfills a need within us. Understanding and recognising that need is the first step in using it for 'good' or 'right', rather than allowing it to be manipulated for 'might'.

Take this example...



The Haka is performed for all types of reasons, in the above case, as a battle cry, or in this example for the pseudo-warfare of team sports, but also it is traditionally used in celebrations or to welcome honoured guests, but either way, it serves as a display of unity and group identity.

Also this...bear with it, it takes a while to get going...



The Dervish is a deeply spiritual dance, performed with great ceremony, and as you can see, as it reaches it's crescendo, the synchronisation, yet individuality of that expression.

Such dances exist within, and at the heart of every culture, and are part of the reason for our success and adaptation towards settled life as a species. Now, with this in mind, consider that this was at the heart of the Dionysus Mysteries, and this is why they were suppressed, for that very reason, and to break that cohesion. This has left us, in the West, bereft of social focus, and eager to allow anyone with a superficial message the opportunity to fill it. And we continue to allow that message to be propogated, rather than accept that we have more to learn from those we consider more primitive.

reply to post by Biliverdin


Most things incorporated in Nazi Germany was from the Romans, and most things incorporated by the Romans was from the Greeks and the greeks well the chain just goes on and on, and a great lot of those things pertain to war. In those times it was beneficial to be ants when the times called for it. Today however, not so much.

And the rest I couldn't said it better myself, I like the interesting dancing vid's, I seen the haka ones before, but never seen the sufi de la rama dance thing, and to tell the truth you will never catch me doing that dance. But whatever, I like those dudes hats and there strange attire. Never seen dudes spinning in circles in dresses like that before, it was interesting to say the least.

After tracking this thread a little a friend of mine asked, "Could being ridden by loa connect to muscular bonding?"

Well, friend, I did follow up on that, and it turns out that the link is in the religious experience. Durkheim coined the term "collective effervescence" in Elementary Forms of Religious Life to describe the bliss and exhilaration that comes from congregating and participating in a ritual act.

Durkheim was concerned primarily with how societies could maintain their integrity and coherence in the modern era.

Durkheim argues that the universal religious dichotomy of profane and sacred results from the lives of these tribe members: most of their life is spent performing menial tasks such as hunting and gathering. These tasks are profane. The rare occasions on which the entire tribe gathers together becomes sacred, and the high energy level associated with these events gets directed onto physical objects or people which then become sacred. The force is thus associated with the totem which is the symbol of the clan, mentioned by Durkheim in his study of "elementary forms" of religion in Aboriginal societies. Because it provides the tribe's name, the symbol is present during the gathering of the clan. Its presence during these scenes, the totem comes to represent both the scene and the strong emotions felt, thus becoming a collective representation of the group.[1]

For Durkheim, religion is a fundamentally social phenomenon. According to Durkheim: "god and society are one of the same…the god of the clan…can be none other than the clan itself, but the clan transfigured and imagined in the physical form of a plant or animal that serves as a totem.[2]"

The group members experience a feeling of a loss of individuality and unity with the gods and according to Durkheim, thus with the group.

en.wikipedia.org...

Factors shared in common between loa possession, and say, a tent revival. Or a rock concert, even:

1. A dissolution of ego boundaries
2. An altered state characterized by heightened perceptions, ecstasy, transcendence
3. Rhythmic movement and chanting

So, yeah, I guess there's a chance that the two utilize the same wiring, which seems to run (at least in part) off of the religion circuitry.

Another friend posited that muscular bonding can take place in a virtual environment, and be neurologically identical to the genuine RL article. MMORPGs as the latest platform for this dynamic: I can testify to it's being a strong probability. It will be interesting to see how that develops as the tools for interfacing w/ virtual worlds and social structures become more sophisticated.

They don't call 'em "Clans" for nothing.

Thanks, friend.

People have muscle memory where your body remembers things it has done before. Everyone has experienced it in riding a bicycle or trying to remember a phone number by punching (dialing for us old folk) an invisible phone.

The use of coordination of movement for transmitting muscle memory seems entirely likely. The use of online games can activate this motor memory as well, so that when your character in a game lands a jump you use muscles in your legs automatically.

A good example of the use of this form of learning for transmission of skills has been found in apprenticeships for as long as there have been skilled crafters.

An old saying for how to teach skills:

"I do it once fast. I do it once slow. You do it with me, then off you go."

(there is a great John Cleese video on training that has him using this phrase. I'll link if I ever find it.)

reply to post by Jakes51


Is ignoring the potential of the mob also playing with fire? If everyone pretends to not care and not know about bonding processes that bind groups, the one person willing to do it takes all and everyone is unprepared for it.