/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3167617]

Could the rise of narcissism, hedonism, and promiscuity in our culture currently be correlated to the enormous population growth we've had in the past half century or so?

Think of families with a huge amount of kids...less attention is given to each child.

More people = more people to compete with socially

social science fags....get in here.

[Anonymous No.3167622]

>Could the rise of narcissism, hedonism, and promiscuity in our culture

stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.3167631]

>>3167622
I'd honestly like to see how you would test with a psychological examination. I mean, do you not see it or does this reflect onto you?

[Anonymous No.3167632]

>>3167617
Nope.jpg
It's the rise of agricultural and medical science.
More food + less disease = more people

[Anonymous No.3167640]

Wow, OP is really damn far out of touch.

Anyway, world population is going to peak around 10 billion after 2050, and then go into decline.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html
http://www.gapminder.org/videos/what-stops-population-growth/

[Anonymous No.3167656]

>>3167632
where in my two posts have I said anything contrary to that? I'm not talking about what has caused population growth, but the results of it. Are you a fucking moron?

[Anonymous No.3167663]

>>3167631
Just so you know, none of those girls were 7. They're all 9 years old except for one who was 8.

[Anonymous No.3167665]

no.

Fact 1: we make less children per capita than any other time.
The reason the population is bigger it is because we dont die like ants anymore cause of medical technology.

Fact 2: yes in big families the attention/care/etc each child gets is little so they must do alot more to prove themselves, but now that families are small, more care is given compared to any other time in history(excluding the 3rd world countries today) and children are more 'bored' because they dont have anything to 'prove' and seek out attention as the old times, on average ofcourse.

Where did you get the rise in narcissism and hedonism?

[Anonymous No.3167666]

>>3167663
you say this like it makes a difference at all.

[Anonymous No.3167672]

How could narcissism result from enormous population growth, less attention to yourself, and heavier competition? If anything all of that should make narcissism LESS likely.

[Anonymous No.3167676]

>>3167617
Well firstly you would have to prove the rise of this personnality disorder, this ideology and this social norm (which are not necessarily linked).

[Anonymous No.3167690]

>>3167665
>Fact 1
is irrelevant

>Fact 2
I agree.

>Where did you get the rise in narcissism and hedonism?
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/04/17/generation-me.html

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissism-epidemic/200905/is-there-epidemic-narcissism-toda
y

http://trueslant.com/austinconsidine/2010/04/07/new-study-shows-narcissism-on-the-rise-among-college
-kids/

I cannot be assed to find you more studies / articles. But honestly, look at how shit is today.

[Anonymous No.3167694]

>>3167672
or 'less' attention to go around, so to speak. So individuals try harder at obtaining it.

[Anonymous No.3167696]

>>3167656
I that case I misunderstood your post.
However.
As you can see from your very own graph the vast majority of population growth has been in the developing world.
Who's more narcissistic/hedonistic the West or the third world?

[Anonymous No.3167703]

>>3167690
How come I get called a fucking moron >>3167656
But this guy say's the same thing and doesn't >>3167665

FUCK YOU OP!

[Anonymous No.3167712]

>>3167696
Couldn't tell you.

However, looking at historical population estimates, the difference in the developed world is more than significant:

http://www.npg.org/facts/us_historical_pops.htm

and it may have no correlation what so ever. Just an idea.

[Anonymous No.3167713]

>>3167694
>more individuals
>less attention
Does not compute. If anything you should talk about globalization and mass media. THAT reduces the number of focal points.

[Anonymous No.3167723]

>>3167694
Narcissism doesn't result from a person trying too hard to get attention (that's a completely different personality disorder). Rather, it's a disorder where a person is convinced that they're far more important and perfect than they really are.

If you wanted to pin a social factor on narcissism, it would be kids getting too much praise and being constantly told that they're unique and "special".

[Anonymous No.3167721]

>>3167713
I agree. The media without a doubt has had an impact.

[Anonymous No.3167718]

>>3167703
because by the time the other guy posted, I figured the thread was going to be derailed and turned to shit, so I stopped caring.

I probably shouldn't have called you a moron, however. ...sorry?

[Anonymous No.3167722]

well the population growth doesnt directly correlate with the rise in narcissism, and even if it did it doesnt determine that there is a causative relationship between the two variables.

it is really hard to determine what specific social dynamic is a direct causal factor for social change. typically it is an aggregate of variables that cause change. however i'm an MA in psych not sociology.

if i were to really put a finger on it, i think that the ease of information in general has sped up, which as a result is casing many other things to explode. for example, a large body of the population (or at least the individuals i assume you're referring to) have cell phones, tv and the internet. through those mediums, communication is easy and commitment to things isnt because were given much more choice.

for example, it used to be much harder to find out what everyone was doing, (e.g. a party, where, when, whose going, what should i wear.), but now with cell phones you can find out if there are 10 different parties and have less of a commitment to one specific thing because it is easier to jump around because of the availability of information.

as a result i think people are less committed not only to social events, but also to each other. this may possibly allow for the potential for people to be less reliant upon each other in certain circumstances.

also, social pressure is stronger. people emulate those who they see. children model behavior after adults. social trends come in and out faster because of tv and the internet, and so does music.

i might be wrong with all my assumptions, but i think the one thing to take away is that, its not necessarily the population directly impacting my life, but i do know that technology is impacting me far more than it impacted my parents and grandparents.

[Anonymous No.3167726]

OP, are you retarded and underage? Go away.

[Anonymous No.3167728]

>>3167617
Families in the west have less kids. So if there is a rise in hedonism, narcissism or promiscuity (which i doubt) then it would be correlated with there being less people in our social circle.

[Anonymous No.3167729]

>>3167690
Didn't read yet.

I know that fewer kids=more narcissistic.
Thats why children with no brother/sisters are on average more self absorbed fucks.
ON average, note that, because its not black and white.

And yeah i can see how it is that narcissism could have risen.

I dont know if you're OP but what he says doesnt have to do with it.

His conclusion is right but his reasoning totally wrong, its not because we have larger population.

[Anonymous No.3167730]

if there is a change the amount of hedonism, narcissism and promiscuity in society it would be that it has actually lessened, not risen.

[Anonymous No.3167740]

>>3167730
yeah, yeah. We need to go back to the 1800s when women would dress up in 3 layers of clothing. Now THAT was sexy.

[Anonymous No.3167746]

>>3167722

another facet that is relatively new to our society is the availability and presence of SO MUCH choice. there was an interesting ted talk on it.

for example, back in the 70's or even 50's, when you wanted jeans, you had 2 options, Levi's and Wrangler's. So when you got the jeans you realized, okay, this is all there is, so i'm satisfied with what it is because there are no other options. it might suck, but what else can you do so you deal and make the best of it or wear no pants, or make your own, which is most likely not going to happen.

in contrast, today, you go to a store and there are thousands of different types of jeans you can choose from, and thousands of different cuts, boot cut, skinny etc. tight fitting, loose fitting, relaxed fitting etc etc. so after you debate and go through all these pairs, you'll most likely end up with a better product today than you did in the 50's. the jeans will look better, be more comfortable, possibly more durable. however, when you leave the store, you're less satisfied, because you're aware that there is so much choice, that you think that you could have done better. leaving you concerned that you didnt do as well as you could have.

think of watching a movie or TV. how often do you just surf back and forth from one thing to the next because you cant commit to one thing, because there might be something better on another channel. so you end up not watching one thing entirely (now this isnt the case 100% of the time, but i'm sure it occurs frequently). however if you're on a 10 hour plane ride and have the choice of 4 movies, you'll probably watch, and enjoy all 4 of them. regardless of what they are, because you have no other options.

[Anonymous No.3167749]

>>3167740
Clothing worn is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.3167757]

Lrn2 medicine and nuitrition

[Anonymous No.3167759]

Theory:

>Higher standard of living
>Service economy
>Modest-income people can afford the trappings of success (nice car, big screen tvs, furniture--all on credit)
>Creates the illusion of higher socioeconomic standing
>People with higher socioeconomic standing often feel more entitled
>Everyone now feels more entitled.

[Anonymous No.3167761]

>>3167746
interesting.

do you have the link to the ted talk?

[Anonymous No.3167782]

I believe it is more connected to our belief in unrestrained individualism. We do not believe in things such as "different but equal cultures", "everybody has an equal opinion", etc. This has dissolved cultural restraints upon decadent behavior, as people respect their own ideals than any sort of authority (primarily cultural authority). This is negative due to the low cognitive capacity of the common man.

[Anonymous No.3167790]

>>3167782

I believe it is more connected to our belief in unrestrained individualism. We believe in things such as "different but equal cultures", "everybody has an equal opinion", etc. This has dissolved cultural restraints upon decadent behavior, as people respect their own ideals than any sort of authority (primarily cultural authority). This is negative due to the low cognitive capacity of the common man.

[Anonymous No.3167796]

>>3167759
Damn straight. As an only child, I demand a yacht. Yes, a yacht, even in this economy.

[Anonymous No.3167801]

>the enormous population growth we've had in the past half century or so?
nope, it's pretty much antibiotics and vaccination

[Anonymous No.3167836]

>>3167801
why are people still having this misunderstanding? jesus.