Jul 12, 2024 07:53 PM
(This post was last modified: Jul 13, 2024 06:28 AM by C C.)
The symbolic professions are super WEIRD
https://musaalgharbi.substack.com/p/weir...rofessions
EXCERPTS: Symbolic capitalists are strange people. Actually, it might be more apt to say we are particularly WEIRD. In decades-worth of empirical studies carried out across the globe, anthropologist Joseph Henrich and his collaborators have documented many ways people from Western, Highly-Educated, Industrial, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) societies diverge systematically from most others worldwide. For instance:
The most immediate implication of these realities, Henrich argued, is that many psychological theories and results claiming to illuminate “human nature” were, in fact, unlikely to generalize to humanity writ large. Key findings had been derived primarily from convenience samples of college students in America and Western Europe whose cognition and dispositions are not well-representative of the societies they hail from, let alone reflecting general tendencies of all mankind. It is therefore critical, he asserted, for psychologists to draw larger and more diverse samples, and to adopt a cross-cultural perspective with respect to key questions.
However, as Henrich later detailed in his 700-page magnum opus on WEIRD societies, the peculiar psychological biases and proclivities of characteristically WEIRD people have important implications for political economy as well.
For instance, in the cognitive profile described above we can see some of the building blocks of symbolic capitalists’ peculiar gravitation towards rational-legal authority (we prefer abstract and universal standards and meritocracy), free markets (we prefer instrumental and mutually beneficial relationships that are entered and exited at will), meritocracy (we valorize hard work, focus on individuals, and associate outcomes with agency), progressivism (we view history as a linear series of events within our control; we focus on the future — on risks, opportunities and possibilities — over the present or the past), and identitarianism (we are individualistic; we strive to distinguish ourselves from others; in interpreting the world, we center questions of authenticity, sincerity, intent, and so on).
Our unique desire to maximize happiness pushes WEIRD people to be restless with what we have, to always look for something better (a better job, a better mate, a better house, better gadgets).
[...] WEIRD modes of thought and action tend to be especially pronounced among symbolic capitalists (including the sociologists Dr. Smith was focused on). There are a few reasons for this:
Colleges and universities serve as the primary gatekeepers in determining who gets to become a symbolic capitalist (and who does not). Critically, these institutions tend to select for people who demonstrate WEIRD tendencies (and filter out those who are insufficiently WEIRD): college admissions essays are, fundamentally, about presenting a unique and compelling curated self to help applicants “stand out” against competitors with similar (or even superior) qualifications; standardized testing requirements and score thresholds filter students based on their cultivated skills in analytical reasoning; GPA and attendance records are largely a proxy for students’ future-orientation and self-discipline.
Post admission, actually attending college — and landing a job in the symbolic professions thereafter — often requires students to sacrifice connections to place and community, to move away from family and lifelong friends, and to develop new, contingent, instrumental, and more superficial relationships. That is, it requires a WEIRD approach to social ties.
All said, WEIRD norms of self-orientation, independence, instrumentalism and meritocracy are so pronounced within institutions of higher learning that those who come from families that are less connected to the symbolic economy (such as first-generation or nontraditional students) often struggle to ‘belong’ at colleges and universities. The sense that colleges and universities are not for ‘people like them’ contributes significantly to lower grades and higher drop-out rates among said students. And even when students from underrepresented or nontraditional backgrounds do manage to refashion themselves according to the dominant institutional culture, aspirants often struggle with feelings of guilt, isolation and inauthenticity despite their professional flourishing.
In short, colleges and universities tend to select for people with WEIRD tendencies, and then refine and exacerbate those inclinations further over the course of one’s academic career... (MORE - details)
https://musaalgharbi.substack.com/p/weir...rofessions
EXCERPTS: Symbolic capitalists are strange people. Actually, it might be more apt to say we are particularly WEIRD. In decades-worth of empirical studies carried out across the globe, anthropologist Joseph Henrich and his collaborators have documented many ways people from Western, Highly-Educated, Industrial, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) societies diverge systematically from most others worldwide. For instance:
- People from WEIRD societies tend to be much more future-oriented than other people: We prioritize patience, discipline, efficiency and planning. We valorize hard work (as something to be celebrated for its own sake rather than something that often simply must be done in pursuit of other objectives). We view time in a linear way, hold faith in 'progress,’ and try to actualize progress according to our visions for the future.
- People from WEIRD societies tend to be very focused on individuals — including and especially ourselves: We ruminate on the mental and emotional states of ourselves and others. We try to analyze others’ apparent motives and dispositions. We work to cultivate and affirm a sense of self (as distinct from others). We value the ability to exercise choice and determine our own future rather than conforming to traditions or expectations. We tend to overvalue our own stuff, to have a strong sense of possession and entitlement with respect to what is ‘ours,’ and more regularly display overconfidence in our own socially-valued abilities.
- People from WEIRD societies tend to prefer instrumental relationships, and ties that are freely entered into and exited over the sorts of duties and bonds that arise organically out of one’s history, circumstances or kinship networks (which we often try to escape).
- People from WEIRD societies tend to prefer abstract standards that apply to everyone and across circumstances over context-dependent judgments and norms. We have much more faith than most others in formal processes and impersonal institutions.
- People from WEIRD societies tend to prize analytical over holistic thinking — and we tend to be particularly focused on ‘central’ actors and on foregrounded actions.
The most immediate implication of these realities, Henrich argued, is that many psychological theories and results claiming to illuminate “human nature” were, in fact, unlikely to generalize to humanity writ large. Key findings had been derived primarily from convenience samples of college students in America and Western Europe whose cognition and dispositions are not well-representative of the societies they hail from, let alone reflecting general tendencies of all mankind. It is therefore critical, he asserted, for psychologists to draw larger and more diverse samples, and to adopt a cross-cultural perspective with respect to key questions.
However, as Henrich later detailed in his 700-page magnum opus on WEIRD societies, the peculiar psychological biases and proclivities of characteristically WEIRD people have important implications for political economy as well.
For instance, in the cognitive profile described above we can see some of the building blocks of symbolic capitalists’ peculiar gravitation towards rational-legal authority (we prefer abstract and universal standards and meritocracy), free markets (we prefer instrumental and mutually beneficial relationships that are entered and exited at will), meritocracy (we valorize hard work, focus on individuals, and associate outcomes with agency), progressivism (we view history as a linear series of events within our control; we focus on the future — on risks, opportunities and possibilities — over the present or the past), and identitarianism (we are individualistic; we strive to distinguish ourselves from others; in interpreting the world, we center questions of authenticity, sincerity, intent, and so on).
Our unique desire to maximize happiness pushes WEIRD people to be restless with what we have, to always look for something better (a better job, a better mate, a better house, better gadgets).
[...] WEIRD modes of thought and action tend to be especially pronounced among symbolic capitalists (including the sociologists Dr. Smith was focused on). There are a few reasons for this:
Colleges and universities serve as the primary gatekeepers in determining who gets to become a symbolic capitalist (and who does not). Critically, these institutions tend to select for people who demonstrate WEIRD tendencies (and filter out those who are insufficiently WEIRD): college admissions essays are, fundamentally, about presenting a unique and compelling curated self to help applicants “stand out” against competitors with similar (or even superior) qualifications; standardized testing requirements and score thresholds filter students based on their cultivated skills in analytical reasoning; GPA and attendance records are largely a proxy for students’ future-orientation and self-discipline.
Post admission, actually attending college — and landing a job in the symbolic professions thereafter — often requires students to sacrifice connections to place and community, to move away from family and lifelong friends, and to develop new, contingent, instrumental, and more superficial relationships. That is, it requires a WEIRD approach to social ties.
All said, WEIRD norms of self-orientation, independence, instrumentalism and meritocracy are so pronounced within institutions of higher learning that those who come from families that are less connected to the symbolic economy (such as first-generation or nontraditional students) often struggle to ‘belong’ at colleges and universities. The sense that colleges and universities are not for ‘people like them’ contributes significantly to lower grades and higher drop-out rates among said students. And even when students from underrepresented or nontraditional backgrounds do manage to refashion themselves according to the dominant institutional culture, aspirants often struggle with feelings of guilt, isolation and inauthenticity despite their professional flourishing.
In short, colleges and universities tend to select for people with WEIRD tendencies, and then refine and exacerbate those inclinations further over the course of one’s academic career... (MORE - details)