Why are people effected by each other?

Post Reply New Topic

I've always been an independant thinker. I cannot understand how someone wouldn't be.
It seems most people learn from others. I have never been able to relate to that.
All my beliefs, morals, and ideas come from me. Nobody has to tell me what to think and I question anything anyone tells me.
I notice a lot of people are effected by other people. I cannot comprehend why.
Why is it that people let each others negative judgments effect them?
Why do people need each others approval?
why do people believe what their told?
I understand that socialization is great for learning more.
But why do most people let other peoples thoughts have effect on their's?

why do you have all these questions when you are able to think for yourself?

Because I cannot think for others.
I have been trying to understand other people better and while I can think for myself just fine I have no idea how other people think. I am baffled when trying to comprehend other people and sometimes like them to explain why they act and think the way they do.

There are a lot of different questions there, but in terms of why people desire approval and are affected by the opinions of others...

I would say that as humans, we innately desire social interactions, affection and intimacy. We also tend to seek acceptance. Whilst there are exceptions to the rule, I feel that most people experience a certain level of rejection when someone does not accept them or appreciate them. This rejection may also impede on a person's ability to socialise or experience intimacy.

Also, I think many people are insecure (myself included) and need some level of validation to feel like they're succeeding. When you experience disapproval from someone, it feeds those insecurities and self-criticisms.

I'd love to switch off my 'affected by what other people think' function. Although it does work for social acceptability, and keeping my clothes on in public.

I should have thought this was fairly obvious. Establishing bonds with others is a survival,trait.
We are mammals and that's how mammals (and a great many others) do it.

We also have the longest childhood of any species, making our young uniquely dependent on the bonds they develop with their elders.

Not only do we have this biological heritage, but one of the things we do in our families, tribes, clans, ethnicities and nations is to create and transmit culture.

All these are vital to our survival as individuals, therefore it is in our individual interests to learn from each other, exchange ideas and form bonds.

This seems so fundamental that I don't really understand what you can mean by saying that beliefs and morals can be self generated morality is mostly about the ethics of actions between people. How can you contemplate the moral and ethical dimensions of an action without taking others into account? This makes no sense to me.

I think this may be an unresolved topic. Once again I have posted something that I am not understanding the answer.
I remembering as a kid I would be asked where I came up with my ideas.
From myself of course. Where else would I get an idea?
Ideas just come to me and I judge them with my logic.
If someone tells me something I will judge that too and decide whether or not I agree.
I do not feel inspired by anything other than my own thoughts.

Seeing how other peoples ideas and ways of functioning are different from mine inspires me to try new things and helps me to find better ways of managing, especially with the stuff i find difficult.
Every experience you've ever had influences your thoughts and ideas. Maybe you truly don't care what other people think of you, but like it or not, you do learn from others, and you are influenced and affected by others.

Yes. I have learned how to do things from others.
But for all my beliefs, philosophies, ideas. These all seem to come from myself.
As a kid I questioned everything and I have always had ideas that were not told to me. I just think them.
Nobody has to tell me what to believe.
I am starting to wonder if other people are able to think independently.
Maybe I am the only real person and just imagined all of you.
Nobody told me to think that.
See, I think on my own.
Programming away my drones.

Go and google solipsism.

You write in English, ergo you are using someone elses idea.

Human nature and it's how animals operate and us. Even kids learn things like social skills and other stuff just by watching how their parents act and they start doing that from when they are born. I think people who don't do this are heading for trouble and a hard life so that is why they need a boost in life so they are given the help they need like being taught social skills. Like as a child, I see a boy throwing chairs in my class, he got sent to the office for the rest of the day. What I got from that was if I throw chairs, I would go to the office too and I didn't want to be in the office so I knew to not throw chairs. I cannot understand how other people cannot learn from other peoples mistakes. Don't they see what consequences they get? I see another boy scream in class and he is given attention and nothing bad happens so I start to scream too. Of course my mom found out I was doing that in school and decided she had to get me out of that class and I needed to be in mainstream with normal kids where I will learn appropriate behavior and she never ever stuck me in special classes again and never wanted me to be in any special schools. Even special needs kids copy other kids so that is why parents want their higher functioning kids with normal kids and even my dad worked in special ed in the 70's and sometimes kids would copy each other and act even more ret*d and that is a problem with special ed when school would stick special needs kids all in one class. Kids act even more inappropriate and even more disabled because they pick up on each other. Normal kids do it too and they call it peer pressure. Even kids with behavior disorders pick up on each other and have even more behavior problems and that is also a problem they have in school for kids with behavior issues. Everyone does it.

Its seems to me that you lack introspective scope concerning your own cognitive processes.

You claim to generate all your ideas internally, yet you employ written English as means of communication. Writing and English are both complex cultural constructs. These were shared with you by your culture through those who raised you. You did not invent either internally. This is doubtless true of a great many other things that you consider your internal content.

The objective reality is that our brains generate ideas in response to the input from our senses. Some of that input is tactile, some visual, olfactory, etc. We experience other people through the same senses. You know what the bully's fist feels like when he hits you not because he is part of some you/other dichotomy but because the impact sends impulses up your nerves to your brain.

You may have trouble empathizing with others, but you cannot be the independent thinker you believe yourself to be while using language on an internet forum. Your claim is profoundly illogical.

Highly social people are more likely to follow the heard and conform to other people's beliefs and opinions.
The less you are inclined to conform to a social network, the more likely you will develop a mind of your own, form your own moral compass, think outside the box.

I think this is a primary difference in processing and perception between NT and ASD. ASD tends to rely more on evidence and logical consistency to perceive their reality. NT tends to rely more on consensus and favour. This leads to the more literal perception of ASD; it is what it is, what it is. NT interprets their reality more impressively; it is what I want it to be, and what I want it to be is what brings the greatest favour, and thus the greatest potential to survive. They don't consciously consider this, their biology is so constructed to produce this behaviour inherently.

Every living thing is egocentric by design. It has senses, or sensors, and a processing unit they feed information to. No living thing is capable of detecting the fact. Only a limited and interpreted expression of the fact, never the fact itself. This is why science is so difficult, because we have no direct means to detect it. It can only be logically concluded through objectively established evidence. Everything you have ever experienced, the whole universe as you know it, never happened any further than your skin. The physical universe is something, but not what any living creature has ever experienced. The interpretation of reality is directly related to the very biological construction of the form that is interpreting it. It is ordinary for a biological form to accept its reality as valid. The very purpose of this mechanism is to function. NT accepts their reality as as valid as we accept ours.

I believe this is a subjective observation of the primary difference between NT and ASD. The primary definition of ASD is deficiency in social and communicative function. Everything you have asked here is exactly that. ASD is defined, not because god says it's wrong, but because it can be clinically demonstrated that this mode of function reduces the potential to survive and maintain quality of life, when compared to the average. Of course, some of this influence is relative. In large anonymous groups, such as civilisation, that place greater strain on sociological functioning, this disadvantage becomes exaggerated. In an environment with less sociological demand, HFA may not be defined, but only the specific and optional disabilities, such as sensory intolerance, poor speech development, etc.

As Shakespeare said it:

It's human Tribalism.

Some people like the OP have a very individualistic sense of identity. On the other hand, I think many humans tend to want to share a collective identity.