The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Is there a word or phrase to describe this?(may not be! May be obvious and I'm dumb)
BlochWave
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Seems like there would be
Let's say you have an environment with a social hierarchy in which a person of high social standing or caste or whatever has, say, an argument with someone outside the hierarchy(say a newcomer vs. the accepted leader)
Is there a word or succint phrase that describes the phenomenon in which other members with a more intermediate standing will automatically side with the high ranking person without question, even if his argument lacks merit or is overtly wrong or flawed? I'm trying to be really general here, I'm sure you're wondering what off the wall circumstances prompt this, but if I told the story you'd realize you didn't care and I just wasted your time, much like I am with this sentence!
Let's say you have an environment with a social hierarchy in which a person of high social standing or caste or whatever has, say, an argument with someone outside the hierarchy(say a newcomer vs. the accepted leader)
Is there a word or succint phrase that describes the phenomenon in which other members with a more intermediate standing will automatically side with the high ranking person without question, even if his argument lacks merit or is overtly wrong or flawed? I'm trying to be really general here, I'm sure you're wondering what off the wall circumstances prompt this, but if I told the story you'd realize you didn't care and I just wasted your time, much like I am with this sentence!
BlochWave on
0
Posts
Like when people loved Episode 1 because they went in assuming that George Lucas could do no wrong and the movie just simply couldn't be bad, and therefore they found it good! (Just kidding! Unless you agree than I'm dead serious)
The meaning's right but it doesn't really convey the right image to me, but maybe that's my fault
Edit: Hmm, blind devotion...
See, my figuring was it's a social type of effect and some psychologist or whoever researches these things may've coined a phrase. It's like a group of people automatically, and without conscious realization even(so if you asked them if the person said something stupid if they'd refute it, and they'd be like YES!), blindly deferring to the opinions of a superior, not even a superior that necessarily COMMANDS such deferment(so the people aren't necessarily direct subordinates or in the command of the superior)
But that's not quite the same, and had I asked that particular scenario someone may've suggested a type of confirmation bias, and I would've liked that. It's like the boss' opinion, by virtue of his position, takes precedence as a preconceived notion. In fact, would confirmation bias would work to describe the Star War's scenario(assuing it's true!)?
The other words and ideas come close, but it seems they lack the inherent snobbery that would be prevailent in those types of encounters.
fevor? - This one implies more toward your situation of dominance, I think.
zeal?
To describe your earlier scenario, it could be:
"an entrenched opinion"
"zealot"
"cultist"
"disciple"
or
Daenris's "fanaticism" works well
'Course, it could just be survival instinct on their part...it's always safe to side with the boss.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
Exactly! The snobbery must be expressed. Part of that is my hurt ego no doubt but this topic was made from genuine curiosity stemming from the event
For the boss example, placating is something you do with the intent of doing it, right? Say your boss asks for your informed opinion about a plan he has. You WANT to give him a fully unbiased answer, but he gave you your opinion, and what you may unfortunately do is start looking for reasons why your boss' way IS the right way, and once you start selectively hunting evidence like that, you're confirming your bias, as it were
Zealot is good too, but take TaGuelle's example and call them zealots, and it's right, but seems...too strong?
Confirmation bias could explain the star wars example, where people may have gone in assuming it would be good, so they think it's good. This is not, however, the same as your first post or the boss example -- which are pretty much covered best by the blind (faith/loyalty/devotion) suggestion.
And it's fervor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink
Groupthink tends more to describe this thought process with regard to anyone in the group, as opposed to the actual leader of the group.
Dictionary.com has this to say about zeal:
"Enthusiastic devotion to a cause, ideal, or goal and tireless diligence in its furtherance"
Allegiance, maybe? Or fealty?
[EDIT] For the snobbery, maybe a descriptor could be added to more accurately express it. Such as 'Elitist Zeal' or 'Cliquish Allegiance,' 'Pompous Zeal'
also ; Bootlicker ; Fawning ; Toadying ;
It's also pretty much implicit in hierarchy, ie hierarchical behaviour, but the combination: hierarchical groupthink, isn't bad either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroup_bias
So far this thread is full of misinformation and nouns that describe either the leader or the follower. The correct term is ingroup bias.
Isn't the leader specifically what he's trying to emulate with the phrase though?
Not exactly no. In the original post he's explicitly asking for a term to describe the phenomenon of members of a group automatically siding with the leader of the group. Ingroup bias is a general phenomenon in which members of a group are preferential to other members of the group. It doesn't really adequately cover the situation of a bunch of group members automatically siding with the leader, even if he's obviously wrong.
No, it really isn't. I'd say it's a lot more complex and varied that you might think.
You mean like agreeing with someone from their own group rather than an outsider. Thanks for your wisdom.
I wasn't saying that authority is negligible - I think anyone who is familiar with Milgram's experiments would agree with that. I am saying that for the purpose of determining a term which defines this phenomenon, the presence of authority is not as important as the fact that one is pandering to a member of the group. Therefore, I think that the closest you are going to get to a specific phrase for this is "ingroup bias towards the leader", because I do not believe there is a particular term that describes what the OP does.
That's what I meant, I was being paticularly NOT eloquent. Ineloquent, if you will.
I can't tell whether you don't have a background in social psychology or whether you are just being rude for the fuck of it, but either way I assure you none of those terms apply. They are similar, certainly, but they are not so clear to the mark as ingroup bias.
Mob, herd or pack mentality, applied as closely as possible to this situation, would describe the group's compliance with the leader's demands, particularly if they would not normally comply.
The "why does it happen" question is nearly impossible, as the best you're going to do for an answer is "it's the way humans work".
SCIENCE!
Also, maybe charismatic authority.
It is ingroup bias, guys.
It seems like it's almost a combination of things. Anyways, thanks for all the replies, most of my day at work consisted of browsing wikipedia's sections on logical and sociological fallacies