… just another blahg …

I’ve been meaning to write about social psychologist Muzafer Sherif’s fascinating research on intergroup conflict and cooperation for a while – especially so after coming across this quote by economic historian Arnold Toynbee.

“The 20th century will be remembered by future generations not as an era of political conflicts or technological inventions, but as an age in which human society dared to think of the welfare of the whole human race as a practical objective.”

Maybe Toynbee got the century wrong, but could his prediction have the power to transform itself in to something close to reality in the 21st century? Consider this, just for a lark.

In 1954, Sherif took a bunch of 12-year old boy scouts to a camping location called Robber’s Cave in Oklahoma. 24 boys were divided in to 2 groups and encouraged to bond as teams.

Over an initial 5-6 day FIRST STAGE, one group spontaneously took the name “The Rattlers” and the other similarly adopted the name “The Eagles.” Even though the 2 groups had never met, they knew of each others’ existence at the location, and they called the other group derogatory names. Supervisors reported that each group insisted on meeting the other for a “competitive sport.”

This led to the SECOND STAGE, which lasted another 5-6 days. A series of competitive activities were arranged with a trophy (on the basis of accumulated team score) and also individual prizes (a medal and a multi-bladed pocket knife) which were to be presented to each of the “winning” group with no consolation prizes being allowed to the “losers.” When the two competing groups were brought together for the first time in the mess hall, there was considerable name-calling (“stinkers”, “braggers’, “sissies”, etc.). They even held their noses when members of the other team were in the vicinity! Before supper that evening, they expressed the desire not to eat with one another.

The THIRD STAGE was one of integration where Sherif tried to bring the groups together to watch a movie, light firecrackers together and such, but there was no appreciable lessening of tensions and interaction often culminated in a food fight. That was until the introduction of a “common enemy” – a superordinate goal that transcended low-level groupism. Sherif arranged for a number of problems which could not be easily ignored by members of the two antagonistic groups, and the attainment of which needed cooperation. He cut off the drinking water supply, for example. He also rigged the bus that was to carry the boys home to appear as if it was stuck in the mud. Both resulted in the Rattlers and Eagles coming together, united to achieve a common goal – survival.

At breakfast and lunch on the last day of camp, it was found that seating arrangements were not along group lines – there was much mingling and voluntarily so. The majority of the boys agreed by the last day that it would be a good thing to return to Oklahoma City all together on one bus!

I fell in love with this research when I first read about in Introduction to Psychology. And stumbling upon Toynbee’s wonderful quote many years later somehow brought it vividly to mind. Question is: could the world, so awfully divided as of now, come together in treating global warming as the “common enemy” it is? Could it possibly lead to us working together to alleviate the terrible impact we have had on our environment so far? It would certainly help in our survival as a species.

One might, of course, easily dismiss this as excessive optimism. But it seems to me, at the very least, worthy of consideration.