|
Post by rittley on Apr 16, 2014 17:59:30 GMT
So I learned ant societies are decentralized in the sense that ants do not receive instructions from a ruler. Rather, they are guided by so called swarm intelligence so that on the basis of communication ants strive to do the most sensible things to be most productive and secure.
Great but this makes me wonder though: if we humans try to follow the ants' example then what will happens is some of us will end up doing the hard work while others will slack off and have a ball. The latter ones will do this because there is no ruler to force them to work and they might even arrogate power to themselves and call them the ruling clique. They will most likely believe that they are "better" than the others who just keep on working without stopping to think that they may get out of this drudgery. Thus these humans who "get out of it" and establish "the aristocracy" regard themselves as smart. Now are they really smart? Because if we say that this type of division and domineering hierarchy is a smarter way, then we also claim that the ants are doing "the stupid way" since they all tend to do the drudgery and not a single one can figure out a way out if it.
However, the human type of hierarchy produces resentment among the workers towards the "elite" who stays away from labor. This animosity has led to many a war. In this sense, it does not seem to be such a smart way, right? Maybe the ants' way is smarter because they all work and do not let anyone be "privileged" (except for reproduction of course)?
So I wonder which way is better - with or without a center?
|
|
|
Post by TenebrousNova on Apr 17, 2014 10:22:15 GMT
Aren't ants technically communistic in the way they work? It's rather fascinating.
|
|