August 30, 2026
By Stephen Stofka
Last week I wrote about the rules and duties that help glue us together in groups. This week I want to write about the self-consciousness of members in a social group. We are aware that we are being judged by others in our group. We want to avoid blame, recrimination and punishment from others. We want to gain the approval of others, to boost our reputation within a group.
Groupies
We are the most important piece in a jigsaw puzzle. As children we learn about the rules of fitting in with the puzzle pieces around us, our family, friends, teammates and workmates. Like the amoebas we learned about in school, those other pieces are constantly reshaping themselves as they adapt to their place in the puzzle. Living in a puzzle takes flexibility, virtue and character.
Virtue
Morality is focused on character, the inner landscape of a person. Moralism is concerned with the customs characteristic of a group. Moralism is about compliance more than character. The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384 – 322 B.C.) emphasized virtue rather than rules or consequences, the other two branches of ethics (Source). A person developed greater virtue through habit. Acting with honesty and charity toward others connected a person’s outer self with their internal feeling.
In the Christian tradition, Jesus emphasized an internal devotion to God. Loyalty to the virtues of the commandments was more important than loyalty to religious ritual (Source). In Matthew 5:28, Jesus said that it was not enough to refrain from committing adultery. A person who was pure of heart would not even lust after a woman. Like Aristotle, Jesus emphasized the connection between acting in the world and the feeling within us as we act.
Biology
Neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky (2023, p. 253) notes that many cultures believe that a belief in a supernatural being is necessary for morality. However, our preference for certain moral rules is rooted in biology, not the supernatural, Sapolsky explains (p. 48). Deep in our brain’s cortex is the insula, a primitive organ responsible for disgust at bad smells and tastes. That reaction in the insula triggers a sense of fear in the nearby amygdala. In the more complex human brain, our insula also responds with moral disgust at certain behaviors.
Our reaction of disgust feels visceral but it is a learned response that varies across cultures. As children, we pay close attention to the faces of our parents and older siblings, learning which actions and objects provoke a facial expression of disgust. Our parents use intonation and certain words like “no” and “yuck” to communicate an appropriate response of disgust regarding objects or foods that could be dangerous to us. As we grow, we learn to attach disgust to certain practices that our family, peer group or the broad culture finds repulsive. These include certain foods, sexual practices and bodily norms, perhaps contact with particular kinds of people or violations of religious rules.
Spectator
Just as we watched others from early childhood, we are keenly aware of being watched. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, the economist and philosopher Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) introduced the idea of the impartial spectator. Our conscience is a psychological and social development where we internalize the learned norms and expectations of our culture.
We compare our circumstances as well as our motivations with others. FOMO, or the fear of missing out, is responsible for several asset bubbles like the tulip mania of the 17th century in Holland, or the recent housing bubble that led to the 2008 financial crisis. We see others profiting off an asset and we want to replicate their gains. Stock traders may buy an asset even if they don’t like the fundamentals of owning that asset. Why? By moving with the herd of traders, they can’t be blamed if the asset declines in value.
Catastrophe and the Herd
A herd is a crowd in motion and the herder is some event like an eclipse, a financial bubble, or a catastrophe like 9-11 or the imminent approach of a hurricane. Acting as individuals, we act in unison as though we were in a Bob Fosse production of All That Jazz. People on the streets of downtown Manhattan the morning of 9-11 may not have understood why there was a rush of people towards them. The event itself was obscured by a cloud of debris several blocks away. People reacted to the stress, fear and anxiety on the faces of those fleeing and joined the stampede away from the site of the collapse. Soon afterwards, the tornado cloud of debris descended on those who paused.
We are drawn to witness common catastrophes because they hold so much personal tragedy. A car accident draws our attention as we drive by. Was that a body lying on the road? We can sit for hours and watch live coverage of a hurricane. Look at the roof of that building sailing away like a Frisbee! From the safety of our armchairs, we marvel at the forces involved. We can recognize the precariousness of our safety without feeling the awful fear when we are ripped from safety in an accident or catastrophe.
The writers of soap opera dramas have long understood that we are drawn to personal tragedy. In 1994, Jerry Springer and his producer changed the format of a staid political talk show to juice up their sagging ratings. The Jerry Springer Show featured lots of personal tragedy, family disputes and occasional violence played out before the cameras (Source). For 24 years, millions of viewers watched and sympathized, watched and laughed, or watched and judged.
Judgment
We are individuals tethered to a larger social group. We internalize the norms and perspectives of others, and externalize our expectations. If I find a gold nugget in a stream, I look furtively around to see if anyone else saw me pick up the nugget. Why? I expect that others will be curious at least. At worst, they might try and take it from me. I may act tired and despondent as though I had found nothing, hoping that I can get down to the nearest claims office and stake a claim. Even out in the mountain wilderness, miners relied on the institution of claim registration to establish a right to mine a parcel of land.
Reputation
The rules of a group and the reputations of individuals in the group reinforce power hierarchies within the group. Psychologist Joshua Greene (2013, p. 43) notes that, in most primate groups, lower ranked individuals fear those of higher rank. Why? The customs of the group favor higher ranked individuals who may reinforce their status with physical discipline. Humans, however, have adapted to co-exist in large groups. We may admire leaders with whom we have no personal contact. People sometimes choose a Presidential candidate whom they would be comfortable with while sharing a meal. In large groups, the reputations of their leaders can shape the success of the group.
What is a reputation? A shaping of history. Next week I want to look at how individuals and groups edit their histories.
///////////////////
Photo by Glen Carrie on Unsplash
Greene, J. D. (2013). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. Penguin Press.
Sapolsky, R. M. (2023). Determined: A science of life without free will. Penguin Press.
Innocent Investor 