“O what we ben! And what we come to!” Russell Hoban, Riddley Walker
In my last article I provided a list of words that help to define We and I thinking. I suggested sorting the words into two groups – admirable or undesirable – and when I did this I came up with the lists below. You’ll notice that the words have also been arranged in pairs, and to my mind the two columns give a good sense of the basics of ‘We’ and ‘I’ thinking.
| Admirable words | Undesirable words |
| Flexible | Rigid |
| Listens | Ignores |
| Respectful | Disrespectful |
| Interested | Dis-interested |
| Common (ownership)* | Private (ownership)* |
| Caring | Uncaring |
| Cooperative* | Competitive* |
| Empathic | Psychopathic (or Sociopathic) |
| Humble | Conceited |
| Self-aware | Oblivious |
| Modest* | Opinionated* |
| Charitable | Mean |
| Farsighted | Shortsighted |
| Clear-sighted | Blinkered |
| Inclusive | Exclusive |
| Broad-minded | Narrow-minded |
| Selfless | Selfish |
Words that define We and I
A We thinker might identify ‘inclusive’ as a key admirable word because, they might say:
“It means that we should devise courses of actions that will involve as wide a range of participants as possible, and will benefit as wide a range of people and organisations as possible. It also reminds us to consider the environment, and biodiversity, and future generations. And when dealing with historical issues, we should make sure that the history is inclusive.”
An I thinker, on the other hand, sees ‘exclusive’ as a key word that helps to explain their world view and in the bluntest of terms might be privately thinking:
“I exclude as many as I can from the benefits of my actions. I treat the environment and biodiversity as irrelevant – they don’t concern me, they are there to be used as resources or dumps. Similarly, I don’t consider future generations, except maybe my own family.
“History is there entirely to suit my purpose – I will use it as I think fit. If an element of history doesn’t help to support my story, I’ll exclude it or demean it. History that supports my story will be celebrated, amplified and made mainstream.
“I’m particularly pleased by how this word ‘exclusive’ has morphed (been morphed?) over time so that its original meaning (based on the verb ‘to exclude’) has been drowned out, and for most common people it now signifies something desirable and aspirational. ‘An exclusive Mayfair gentleman’s club’ or ‘Richard Branson’s exclusive Necker Island resort’ are, naturally (and correctly) set up to exclude most people, so it’s quite a trick to make the hoi polloi think they are virtuous objects of desire.”
Are We and I part of the evolutionary process?
Many of the basics of both We and I seem to be hard-wired into us – it’s possible both approaches have, in different ways, provided strong evolutionary advantages to the human species.
We thinking and action encourages mutual aid and protection. When human society first developed, there were enormous advantages for small groups of humans to live and hunt, care for children and defend themselves, together. These urges towards collective action, whether genetic or behavioural, were passed on to future generations simply because they helped people to survive and, therefore, to breed. Presumably individuals who failed to cooperate had ‘lower’ breeding success (and rightly so!).
There would also have been occasions, however – when individuals or families had their backs to the wall – that called for a more I way of doing things to ensure survival, even if it was sometimes to the detriment of others. Individuals and families who looked after themselves and fought tooth and nail to survive would have had a better chance to do just that – survive. And so the behaviour and/or genes for competition would have been passed on.
What do the We and I urges mean for us today?
It is beyond doubt that we now have both tendencies in us – the urge to cooperate and the urge to compete – and both have their advantages. How we got here is, to a large extent, irrelevant. What’s much more important is what we decide to do with this internal contradiction from now on. Evolution has also given us hands and language, but it remains our choice whether we use them to help and support or to fight and antagonise.
We may be the products of our evolutionary history but we now inhabit a very different world. There are far fewer sabre-toothed tigers waiting outside our caves. Humans are more crowded together and more connected, through global transport and information networks. We also live on a planet that is reaching the limits of what it can support in terms of resources, pollution, habitat loss and reduced biodiversity – and which is going through massive climate change.
The ‘winner takes all’ mentality that sometimes served our ancestors well – and then, for many millennia, served individual humans and their families well (some much more than others) – without causing too much impact on the planet as a whole (though it significantly impoverished or killed millions overall and contributed to wiping out a number of species) has maybe, just maybe, outlived its usefulness as the prime mover of human behaviour.
Selfishness has reached its tipping point
We are at the tipping point. Individuals who have wealth and power today do so either because their ancestors were talented practitioners of I-type actions (and their gains are therefore inherited), or they are themselves modern day kings and queens of I, and have used their strategies to push themselves to the top.
Once they have power or wealth, they use their I skills to maintain their position. Do you recognise anyone here? The people who govern us, or command other levers of power and influence, have overwhelmingly got to where they are through their ability to use their I-ness, or through inherited advantages (‘Yes, your I-ness’). And, worryingly, but not surprisingly, such people are not very good at devising We solutions.
Unfortunately, for all of us (and I mean ALL of us, not just the 99.9%), we desperately need a new approach. We cannot turn around the multitude of problems that are facing humanity and the world by continuing to allow unfettered economic growth and, for the very few, unbelievable wealth. We have to move towards a more Weway of doing things – urgently and across a great many diverse issues including wealth-sharing and well-being, environmental restoration and peaceful solutions rather than conflict.
Naturally, I-thinkers won’t be happy with this though.
Next time … What We is and what it is not.
