Consider this article.
In short, it explains the statistical phenomenon that for any human (x) with set number of friends (y), at least one friend (z) will have a set number of friends (y') that is significantly higher than x's y. Why? Because x is part of z's social circle, and it's much easier to be 1:100 than it is to be 1:5.
But the tone of this article is not "so stop comparing and appreciate the people you DO have, those people who will tolerate your drunken revelations or ponder your queer thoughts." No!
This is also why people think of certain beaches or museums or airports as usually busier than they actually are: by definition, most people aren't there when they're less crowded.The article takes what could be an opportunity to expose the irrational, consumerist underbelly of demand-based economy, and chooses instead to make it into a reductive account of the observation bias.
Modern vanities.
2 comments:
oh my. the picture.
All good points, D. This article misses the boat.
I like the good old "grass is always greener" truism better than these statistics anyways.
It isn't just about numbers of people after all. Our complaints are just as often about quality of friendships [coolness, closeness, smartness]...things we don't think about statistically.
Plus it just makes more sense to me that we perceive others as preferable to ourselves because we are competitive, jealous creatures [partly trained in the art by capitalism, of course]
love,
Storm
There are more where that came from, if you want to see. "Solarfest," it's called. Also filed under the synonym "Woodstock 2007"
Post a Comment