Thread: Why do we talk to other people?

Well talking in general isn't always debating about a certain topic. When I talk with my friends we mostly just tell jokes and talk about movies and video games and stuff. There's never any real clashing of opinions on anything or arguments though, I enjoy hearing different view ponits, especially on movies.

So to answer your question, people talk for a lot of different reasons, mostly because it's fun, it's not always about opinions on stuff.

Sorry if none of this makes sense and I completely missed the meaning of your post, it's 1:24 am right now and I'm tired as shit..

Originally Posted by Arutad

I realize that's a strange question. But it does puzzle me. When we talk, we generally bump into many alien opinions that contradict ours. It's known to be pleasant to talk to those who hold the same opinions, we even quite affectionately call them soulmates, but most of the time we're surrounded by people who hold opinions different from ours. Take this forum .

So when we look at a talking activity objectively, it an activity that is equal to a waste of time. No strong pleasant feelings get derived from talking to people who don't share your views, and no exchange of knowledge happens when all parties reject each other's knowledge as wrong. That could be redeemed to a degree by having successful arguments, no matter on the winning or losing side. But usually arguments don't happen, even though discussion often takes the deceptive form of an argument, because all sides are decided on what they think beforehand

It's rather puzzling that having experienced these dead-ends daily, something keeps us talking to others again and again! What is it?

Even if we are sure our own knowledge is correct, we should still seek the knowledge of others. Today's truth is often tomorrows ignorance. Even if there knowledge has no effect on us, we can at least say we were wise enough to listen openly to both sides of the story.

To put it simply: humans are inherently social creatures. We crave social contact, even if it is with those who oppose our opinions, because we have evolved to do so. It's the reason why people form groups, and why loners are regarded as "weird". Indeed, a look at the elimination game shows this quite alarmingly.

Because humans are originally gregarious animals, therefore we have social needs :p

Originally Posted by Maverick

There's never any real clashing of opinions on anything or arguments though, I enjoy hearing different view ponits, especially on movies.

You're lucky if there are no clashes I'd say that it depends on what is talked about. Movies are created to produce the same feelings and opinions, no surprise that they cause no arguments. If you talk about your life and what you did and what you want, there's nothing to argue about, too, it's an exchange of descriptions. Clashes happen whenever you speak about some "topic", not sharing data about yourself or what you've seen, but on a particular topic.

Originally Posted by Danielway

Even if we are sure our own knowledge is correct, we should still seek the knowledge of others. Today's truth is often tomorrows ignorance. Even if there knowledge has no effect on us, we can at least say we were wise enough to listen openly to both sides of the story.

What if the thinking is that your own knowledge is bullshit, and that of others is bullshit, too? Unless we're both specializing in a serious field like particle physics, the "knowledge" of both of us is a set of prejudiced opinions. We've never bothered to check them fully. Isn't it useless to debate about what is known to be subjective beforehand? And yet we do.

Originally Posted by Kiza

To put it simply: humans are inherently social creatures. We crave social contact, even if it is with those who oppose our opinions, because we have evolved to do so.

Originally Posted by khh

Because humans are originally gregarious animals, therefore we have social needs :p

We have a complex mind, unlike animals. We should be able to stop an activity that is useless. We can bear the cold, can keep ourselves forcibly awake when we're falling down from tiredness, but can't keep ourselves from talking to others?

Originally Posted by Arutad

We have a complex mind, unlike animals. We should be able to stop an activity that is useless. We can bear the cold, can keep ourselves forcibly awake when we're falling down from tiredness, but can't keep ourselves from talking to others?

Oh, other mammals minds are fairly complex too. Besides, you could probably stop talking to people if you wanted to, but you'd find it uncomfortable and you'd crave social stimuli. Also, you'd probably go crazy.

Just like keeping yourself forcibly awake, you could forcibly avoid social interaction, yes. But, to stay with the metaphor, you have to sleep some time. Social interaction is a need for humans, like sleep, or food. Like khh said, humans crave social stimuli. We're not naturally individual creatures.

Originally Posted by Arutad

You're lucky if there are no clashes I'd say that it depends on what is talked about. Movies are created to produce the same feelings and opinions, no surprise that they cause no arguments. If you talk about your life and what you did and what you want, there's nothing to argue about, too, it's an exchange of descriptions. Clashes happen whenever you speak about some "topic", not sharing data about yourself or what you've seen, but on a particular topic.


What if the thinking is that your own knowledge is bullshit, and that of others is bullshit, too? Unless we're both specializing in a serious field like particle physics, the "knowledge" of both of us is a set of prejudiced opinions. We've never bothered to check them fully. Isn't it useless to debate about what is known to be subjective beforehand? And yet we do.



We have a complex mind, unlike animals. We should be able to stop an activity that is useless. We can bear the cold, can keep ourselves forcibly awake when we're falling down from tiredness, but can't keep ourselves from talking to others?

Todays knowledge is most likely flawed. But its all we have for now. Talking to others is like doing a reality check on ourselves.

Originally Posted by khh

Oh, other mammals minds are fairly complex too. Besides, you could probably stop talking to people if you wanted to, but you'd find it uncomfortable and you'd crave social stimuli. Also, you'd probably go crazy.

Originally Posted by Kiza

Just like keeping yourself forcibly awake, you could forcibly avoid social interaction, yes. But, to stay with the metaphor, you have to sleep some time. Social interaction is a need for humans, like sleep, or food. Like khh said, humans crave social stimuli. We're not naturally individual creatures.

Well why are you both so sure of that? It may be a habit to interact with other human beings, for all we know. No habit, no need. Sure, it's hard to imagine that the mind would work the same way without presence of other human beings, but that's not equal to death, unlike lack of food.



I want to draw out an example of a situation that puzzles me. Maybe you will have something valuable to comment?

You must've already seen such situations in forums, so it is easily recognizable... Let's say somebody comes with a problem, asking for an advice. The problem gets described, replies with advices follow. But the OP does not take any of the given advices and won't discuss them, the OP will soon get distracted either by discussing other aspects of the topic, or by sharing what else he thinks about it. In either case, let's assume that from his words it's clear that he ignored all advices. And it's clear as daylight that he had just wasted his own time by creating the entire thread focused at asking for advices, because he didn't need them

If you can imagine yourself in that situation, or have seen it, then what do you think his motivation for creating the thread was?

"Humans are social creatures" may actually mean : "humans evolved to have social behavior because cooperation was the only way they could survive".

In the "old days" being social meant sharing the work that ensured survival of the community and self (hunt, fruit gathering, keeping the fire burning...). The structure of the community was additionally reinforced through rituals and given context through myths. I think human brain evolved a kind of susceptibility for ideas that promote feeling of belonging to a group (like religion)

Today you are no more independent and self-sufficient than our ancestors from 10,000 years ago. However, all your material needs can be met by interacting with society through non-personal means (by exchanging money, for example).

Maybe we don't have a genuine way of feeling connected to our 'tribes' any more and now we're just compensating in different ways.

You could also follow the link in my sig. It's about loneliness in the modern society. It gives another perspective, saying that need for socializing without substance is a modern invention.

It is an interesting question. About 90% of time people chit-chat what is really nonsense, rather then talk because it is necessary. Humans are social beings and most of us like to be around other people and talk for enjoyment.

This thread isn't nearly senseless enough!

If we stopped communicating, we would all die. Win.

Originally Posted by SnakeCharmer

all your material needs can be met by interacting with society through non-personal means (by exchanging money, for example).

Can they? You have to work (or even find work online), and that is connected to people. But that's obvious, other things are more subtle, like hobbies and other activities. Many of them are connected to people indirectly. Listening to music is indirectly being in the presence of a singer. Watching TV is watching the lives of other people. Even thinking itself is mostly about people! There's no safe haven to retreat to.

Nice link. Although I think it exaggerates the current situation a little, I personally know many people who live out "real" friendships and don't care for virtual ones much, using phones to invite others rather than a medium of a long conversation. For now they still exist.

Maybe we don't have a genuine way of feeling connected to our 'tribes' any more and now we're just compensating in different ways.

There were rumors about some children who grew up in the wilderness and didn't take interest in other people. I can't provide a link unfortunately. So it would seem that the need for socialization is not genetic but rather socially created.

Originally Posted by Arutad

Can they? You have to work (or even find work online), and that is connected to people.

Yes, but you don't see the effects of your work immediately.
You usually get some virtual money on your bank account (just a number). Then you go to a store and buy food (killed or grown by other people you never get to see). You pay by giving paper bills or a credit card to a cashier, who has no direct connection to the goods you're buying. And most of the time people don't even make eye contact when doing that.
The whole thing is devoid of direct social experiences.

I don't think you can say that hunting in a group has the same psychological effects as trying to organize a marketing campaign for a new product.

Originally Posted by Arutad

But that's obvious, other things are more subtle, like hobbies and other activities. Many of them are connected to people indirectly. Listening to music is indirectly being in the presence of a singer. Watching TV is watching the lives of other people. Even thinking itself is mostly about people! There's no safe haven to retreat to.

Hm. A lot of hobbies and activities are undertaken for the sole purpose of socializing. Again, people struggling for survival have very little time for things like that.

Originally Posted by Arutad

There were rumors about some children who grew up in the wilderness and didn't take interest in other people. I can't provide a link unfortunately. So it would seem that the need for socialization is not genetic but rather socially created.

Maybe it's like language. The exact language one uses is socially determined, but the ability to understand language (the infrastructure) is present in our biological brains. You need to use it up to a certain age or it becomes useless.

Another thing to consider: all of those children were brought up by social animals (wolves, cattle, monkeys, apes...) and accepted social norms and some of the behavior of the respective species. That would indicate they do have a biological predisposition for becoming social.

http://www.feralchildren.com/en/children.php?tp=0

Originally Posted by SnakeCharmer

The whole thing is devoid of direct social experiences.

That's of no help. I experimented with self-isolation at one point, and that was the conclusion. In the absence of direct socializing you'll find indirect one to be a decent substitute. So intead of losing the social instinct you switch to other means of fulfilling it.

I don't think you can say that hunting in a group has the same psychological effects as trying to organize a marketing campaign for a new product.

Imaginary people are people, too, even if it's a shitty singer or a lame writer . Our brain doesn't care whether the experience is with real people or with absent people. The link with a book review that you posted a while ago points out the same lack of care to discern.

Originally Posted by Arutad

That's of no help. I experimented with self-isolation at one point, and that was the conclusion. In the absence of direct socializing you'll find indirect one to be a decent substitute. So intead of losing the social instinct you switch to other means of fulfilling it.

Your original question was why do we socialize.
My answer was: we socialize because our brains evolved to reward social behavior with feelings of pleasure and to punish lack of social contact with feeling of loneliness. This was important because direct social interaction was necessary for our survival.

I never mentioned anything about losing social instinct. If anything, I think it's impossible to lose it because it's hard coded in our brains.
That's why you need to substitute direct social contact with indirect.
I'm not really saying anything in contradiction with what you're saying and vice versa.

Originally Posted by Arutad

Imaginary people are people, too, even if it's a shitty singer or a lame writer . Our brain doesn't care whether the experience is with real people or with absent people. The link with a book review that you posted a while ago points out the same lack of care to discern.

You are right about brain easily mixing up real and imaginary experiences.
But again, there is a reason why our brain needs this kind of stimulation and is 'willing' to fool itself.
Just like our need for sex. Your brain rewards sex with feelings of pleasure for the same reasons it rewards socialization: because it's necessary for survival of our genes. Now, you can fool your brain with masturbation and stimulate the reward pathways. But are you willing to say it's the same thing as sex?

My point is: we are substituting for something. If we're doing it all the time, there must be strong reasons for it. Since humans seem to be social all over the globe, maybe it has something to do with our biology.

Originally Posted by Arutad

Well why are you both so sure of that? It may be a habit to interact with other human beings, for all we know. No habit, no need. Sure, it's hard to imagine that the mind would work the same way without presence of other human beings, but that's not equal to death, unlike lack of food.

I never said it would kill you, I said it would make you crazy. I don't understand your objection here.

Originally Posted by Arutad

You must've already seen such situations in forums, so it is easily recognizable... Let's say somebody comes with a problem, asking for an advice. The problem gets described, replies with advices follow. But the OP does not take any of the given advices and won't discuss them, the OP will soon get distracted either by discussing other aspects of the topic, or by sharing what else he thinks about it. In either case, let's assume that from his words it's clear that he ignored all advices. And it's clear as daylight that he had just wasted his own time by creating the entire thread focused at asking for advices, because he didn't need them

If you can imagine yourself in that situation, or have seen it, then what do you think his motivation for creating the thread was?

While it it obvious to him and everyone in hind sight that creating the thread was pointless, that doesn't mean he knew it at the time of creation. Maybe he was unsure, maybe he wanted reassurance. Maybe he wanted someone else to justify the action he already had in mind. Maybe he just wanted to vent.

Originally Posted by SnakeCharmer

I'm not really saying anything in contradiction with what you're saying and vice versa.

That's because I wasn't objecting to you . I was adding other thoughts instead, in which you would either be interested or not at all.

My point is: we are substituting for something. If we're doing it all the time, there must be strong reasons for it. Since humans seem to be social all over the globe, maybe it has something to do with our biology.

Well maybe. So the only thing that's clear is that nothing is clear

Originally Posted by khh

I never said it would kill you, I said it would make you crazy. I don't understand your objection here.

It was not an objection but a disagreement that lack of socializing is the same as lack of food.

While it it obvious to him and everyone in hind sight that creating the thread was pointless, that doesn't mean he knew it at the time of creation.

That's a strange picture of human beings. He was looking for advice, then somehow he stopped and decided that looking for it was pointless. Or maybe he wasn't looking, but the whole thread was a ruse to vent feelings, etc. Well, why couldn't he post in the thread "Don't waste time for giving me an advice, I don't need it now", or if his thread was a ruse, couldn't he warn beforehand that the advice isn't needed? . I don't know, this picture looks like he doesn't know what he is doing at all, doesn't give it much thought. I would like to think that it's not true, that's a pretty grim picture of human psyche if we don't fully realize what we're doing and are driven by various motives that we don't even try to analyze.