Search Results

This chapter addresses the question of why some canids live in groups, while others do not, and asks what shapes their societies. The behavioural and ecological selective pressures of group living are discussed. It is argued that while behavioural benefits may favour sociality in wild canids, ecological factors create the framework within which behavioural pressures operate, and dictate the balance of costs and benefits between group membership and dispersal.

The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is the most widely distributed extant canid species, and is present in a broad range of habitats ranging from arctic tundra to deserts to city suburbs. Throughout its range, its general social system encompasses a territorial breeding pair accompanied by up to eight subordinate individuals. However, there is substantial plasticity in social organization, principally through variation in territory size, group size, and group structure. This chapter reviews work undertaken in a long-term study in Bristol, England, investigating the mechanisms and benefits of group formation in a population of urban red foxes.

Pathways of social group formation are poorly known for the origin of the eukaryotic cell, sexual reproduction, and many interspecific mutualisms. In the origin of multicellularity and eusociality, social group formation has usually occurred via a subsocial pathway (association of parents and offspring), with a semisocial pathway (association of same-generation organisms) occurring occasionally. The essential genetic condition for social group formation in groups exhibiting altruism is that relatedness should be positive – a prediction overwhelmingly supported by available evidence in the case of both the origin of multicellularity and the origin of eusociality. Non-genetic factors (ecological or synergistic) facilitate social group formation by increasing the benefits of grouping and the costs of living singly. Ecological factors promoting the formation of multicellular organisms and eusocial societies include environmental stresses and predator pressure. A major synergistic factor promoting the formation of multicellular organisms, eusocial societies, and interspecific mutualisms is division of labour.

A series of major transitions in evolution has generated the biological hierarchy (e.g., genes in cells, cells in organisms, organisms in societies) observed today. Each transition requires that previously selfish, free-living individuals join together to form a group resembling an individual in its own right. This book seeks to identify the principles of social evolution that underlie the major transitions, focusing on the evolution of the eukaryotic cell, sexual reproduction, multicellularity, eusociality, and interspecific mutualisms. It suggests that each major transition has three stages – social group formation, social group maintenance, and social group transformation. Using Hamilton's inclusive fitness theory (kin selection theory) as its conceptual foundation, the book investigates two underexplored issues. First, to what extent do common principles operate at each stage of the major transitions and what is the evidence for their operation; and second, what are the principles underlying social group transformation?

Drawing on the three cases discussed in the preceding chapters, this chapter compares the process of group formation and the emergence of suprahuman entities and guidance processes, and extends the social identity approach to creativity to encompass suprahuman entities. It argues that Smith, Wilson, and Schucman played a distinctive role in mediating a first-person voice that they claimed was not their own. But their personal self-concept as mediator of something more than themselves cannot account for the formation of a new group around a newly revealed spiritual path. If an emergent group does not accept the presence of the suprahuman entities, no group will form and no path will emerge. Indeed, without group recognition, the individual claimant is likely to be perceived as eccentric, if not crazy. This means that the group itself is constituted in its own self-conception through its recognition of the presence of one or more suprahuman entities conveyed by and at the same time distinct from the humans who mediate them.

Chapter 6 turns to another form of associative leader engagement. Specifically, Chapter 6 examines the rise of organizations founded by SV150+ CEOs and founders. Special attention is paid to a new organizational form: the corporate social advocacy organization (CSAO), which we define as a political organization, founded directly by corporate elites, that pursues a narrow issue or public interest policy agenda, and seeks to involve the general public in its advocacy work (as members or supporters). The chapter uncovers nineteen groups founded by SV150+ elites, among them several CSAOs. Chapter 6 examines where these groups came from, what they do, and how they connect with other forms of SV150+ political activity.

The most interesting aspect of systems is their birth and formation because it brings novelty into the world. How does such creativity, or constructivity work its way? We start by discussing the concepts of novelty, innovation and emergence generally in the framework of dynamical systems. We then turn to birth processes at the same system level before looking at the emergence of new entities at higher levels of a system. We conclude with a discussion of group formation as one intermediate step to the emergence of a new system level.

This chapter uses research on motivation to consider why some and not others were motivated to participate in the process of group formation and how competing motives directed toward different goals were given voice as alternate “selves.” It argues that the alternate selves can be understood as group-identified selves, that is, as selves that were motivated to speak for the group as a whole and thus to guide the emergence of the group as a group. In social identity terms, these group-identified selves—the Lord, the Higher Power, and the Voice—articulated the norms and values of the group and “chastised” individuals when their individual identities threatened the goals of the emerging group. Individuals were motivated to postulate or confirm the presence of a suprahuman entity and its role in guiding them when doing so promised to resolve deep-seated problems. In so doing, they became founding teams. Individuals were motivated to convert—becoming first followers—when their individual aims meshed with or could be positively transformed in light of the apparent goals of the postulated entity.

This chapter attempts to evaluate the degree of groupness associated with the category “Christians.” It moves from an analysis of when and how Christianness mattered at the level of the individual to an analysis of when and how Christianness was a basis for group-formation. It considers, in particular, how Christians responded when they were targeted as a group by outsiders. A review of episodes of persecution in North Africa from the end of the second until the beginning of the fourth century shows that, despite of their leaders' incitement to do so, Christians seldom opposed a communal response to the persecutors, and that a significant number of them chose to suspend, if only temporarily, their Christian membership. Additionally, when Decius gave the order that all inhabitants of the Roman Empire must sacrifice to the gods for restoration of order and security, the majority of Christians complied. They considered the sacrifice a requirement of their membership in the imperial commonwealth, and they did not activate their Christian membership in this context. On the other hand, with the emergence of the strong figure of a “monarchical bishop,” Christians began bonding around their leader.

This chapter uses the case of Asian Americans to show that when studying immigrant political incorporation, immigrant status may not be the most illuminating factor to focus on. Rather, one must consider how other important variables affect the process of immigrant political incorporation. It then discusses additional reasons to build on existing models of political incorporation that have to do with the nature of group formation.

This concluding chapter highlights the distinctive feature of the three cases—their claim that a suprahuman presence was involved in the emergence process—and discusses its implications for understanding emergent groups and the creative process. It argues that each of these suprahuman “presences” was motivated by an expansive vision and was intent on guiding the human collaborators toward a goal—a restored church, a fellowship of recovering alcoholics, and a metaphysical training program. Belief in these presences and their interest in guiding the group not only stabilized the process and structured the group, but also supported claims regarding the authorship of the key texts and the ultimate origins of the group. The chapter also considers key aspects of Emile Durkheim's Elementary Forms of the Religious Life.

In this first chapter, we present two speeches by Islamic State movement founder Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The first dates from 1994 and contains evidence of him adopting the unique framework of ideas, largely inspired by his perspective as an Islamist in Jordan, that would become very familiar to students of the current Islamic State. The second speech, from 2004, allows us a glimpse of Zarqawi’s worldview as his insurgency in Iraq is poised to transition from a small network to a nationwide movement with an expanding global reach.

This chapter introduces the economic problem of the origin of innovation. It observes that we don’t really understand the origins of innovation very well, particularly the origin of entrepreneurship. It points out that this is a weakness for innovation theory, and particularly Schumpeterian or evolutionary economic theory, as well as for innovation policy that is built upon such frameworks. Introducing the meaning of a commons, the chapter connects this to the innovation problem, working through several stories about the origin of innovation in terms of mountain bikes, computers, and modern science. It also discusses the role of group formation and governance in this early stage process.

This chapter introduces the members of the 7008er network at the occasion of a significant gathering, when seven families with children born from the same sperm donor come together at a hotel in the Midwest. From the beginning, the children in this network seek to construct themselves as a family. Love, trust, and harmony serve as guideposts in the unscripted land of donor-linked families. They also use structures they know from traditional families, such as a sibling pecking order. As the group expands to incorporate new members, the original narrative of family membership fails to describe the reality of competing allegiances among teenagers. Instead of remaining a coherent group, the members of this network break into a number of separate factions. Born between 1995 and 2001, the kids interviewed are between fifteen and nineteen years old.

This chapter looks across the five featured networks that span thirty years. It opens with a discussion of the historical moments in network creation and the different developmental ages of the children in these networks. The chapter highlights aspects that vary over time, such as parents’ reasons for connecting, naming conventions, and uses of technology. It then turns to an examination of the kinds of interactions within the networks (e.g., transactional and generative) and also the importance of trust and validation that participants can find in the networks. It also discusses the complex consequences network participation holds for its members within all networks. Interpersonal dynamics emerge separately among the children and their parents. Mothers and girl children are more likely to maintain each network. Further, since network membership is never fully known, attempts by the kids to establish a social order and to develop close ties are always shifting and evolving. The chapter ends with a discussion of the place of the donor in the network.

The members of the Tourists are not really sure what they are looking for when they connect with other people to whom they are connected by reliance on the same sperm donor. The mere existence of donor siblings is a novelty to the members of this network, but like tourists who are only curious about the sites in a different land, a brief visit with the others suffices. Interestingly, the donor makes himself known to this network, but he too is a tourist who sets clear limits on what he has to offer the children born from his sperm donation. The Facebook group and holiday cards sent within the network are reminders of membership, but there is little other interaction. Born between 1994 and 2001, the kids interviewed are between sixteen and nineteen years old.

The Soul Mates network is distinctive on two counts. First, it is a large network with over twenty-two children. Second, it represents a turning point in network creation: the initial group formed when all of the children were toddlers. The children in this network thus have known about donor siblings for as long as they can remember. Among the members of this network one finds neither group cohesion nor bland disinterest. Rather the network provides opportunities for pairs of parents and pairs of children to find particular meaning in their relationships with each other. The fact that there is a medical issue of autism spectrum disorder (which might come from the donor) running through some offspring complicates—and sometimes intensifies —these relationships. Born between 2003 and 2006, the children interviewed are eleven- and twelve-year-olds.

The chapter concludes the book by placing innovation commons in a broader sweep of economic history in order to emphasize the institutional origin of innovation as an outcome of cooperative pooling of information and knowledge. It argues that cooperation to create a common pool resource in order to discover entrepreneurial opportunities is the evolutionary origin of innovation. It explains the institutional origin of innovation as the governance to facilitate this cooperation in order to solve the fundamental economic problem of discovery of entrepreneurial opportunity. The solution is in the use of institutions to pool distributed information. It explores implications for economic theory, and particularly the increased importance of institutional analysis for understanding the economics of innovation, industrial dynamics and economic evolution. It concludes by arguing that the innovation commons is the original sharing economy.