Us and Them: Understanding Your Tribal Mind (Hardcover)

~ (Author) "Scientists, when they turn their attention to people, usually talk about the entire human race or about the individual human being..." (more)
Key Phrases: other human kinds, cheat detector, different human kinds, United States, Inventing Tradition, New York City (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

With this impressively well-researched work, Berreby attempts to apply the tools of science to an impossibly large question: what is it about the human mind that makes us believe in categories like race, gender and ethnicity? Spanning countless disciplines, Berreby draws on a staggering variety of sources, from St. Paul's epistles and the philosophical essays of David Hume to the evolutionary theory of Stephen Jay Gould and the evolutionary psychology of Cosmides and Tooby. Yet, structurally, the text feels rather scattered. It moves breathlessly from one citation or example to another without any clear indication of where it's headed or what the overall point is; often, it reads less like a deliberately argued work than a collection of anecdotes, musings and insights. Fortunately, Berreby, who has written for various publications including the New York Times and the New Republic, has a casual and conversational style that makes even his most complicated points straightforward and commonsensical: at the most scientific moments, such as his thoughtful explanation of the physical effects of stress and stigma on the brain, Berreby still requires no specialized knowledge from the reader. And he illustrates other points, like the role food plays in the perception of difference, with revealing and amusing examples. The book may not break any new intellectual ground, but it does offer an entertaining survey of a vast, and vastly important, topic of study. (Oct. 24)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Scientific American

Each of us has experienced a feeling of kinship with someone who shares a love of chocolate, a passion for foreign films, or perhaps an affinity for a person with the same skin color or ethnic identity. We might also feel alienated from someone with the same qualities if he or she belongs to a "group" we do not like.

But what exactly is this seemingly natural tendency to sort others into "kinds"? This question forms the core of Us and Them, which explores the conscious and unconscious ways in which people classify one another—and more important—why. How humans can use this propensity constructively, rather than destructively, remains a central issue of our time, argues David Berreby, a veteran science journalist. Although this penchant may be hardwired into our brains, ultimately we choose how to live. Religious strife, political conflict and clan rivalries boil down to individual behavior.

Berreby says the sciences of brain and mind offer "a new way to look at love of country, at culture, at religion (and at hatred too)." Researchers are starting to understand "how and why people think and feel in tribes, and why all of us are capable of both tribal good and tribal evil." Advances are allowing scientists to grapple with such questions as "Why can’t we all get along?" Berreby investigates the social, psychological and neurological mechanisms that move humans to categorize. For example, he considers how codes in the nervous system predispose us to organize perceptions, including ones that help us feel how other people feel. Science’s assault on our beliefs about race, religion and nationalism has shown that even much of "common sense" is both blind and cruel. Berreby reminds us that not long ago North Americans held by common sense that slavery was natural, women should not vote and only heterosexuals deserved respect. "Good riddance to all that," he says. Still, attitudes die hard. "A white person and a black person in today’s New York City can agree over coffee that race is ‘all in your mind,’" Berreby contends. "But when they leave Starbucks and raise their hands to hail a taxi, the white person is more likely to get a cab. In that moment, race is as real as gravity."

Given our drive to categorize, Berreby reflects thoughtfully on how to do so responsibly. "The Us-Them code does not own you," he concludes. "You own it."

Richard Lipkin

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 384 pages
• Publisher: Little, Brown and Company (October 24, 2005)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0316090301
• ISBN-13: 978-0316090308
• Product Dimensions: 9.4 x 6.2 x 1.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (10 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #317,112 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Types, categories and groups, June 27, 2006

By	Stephen A. Haines (Ottawa, Ontario Canada) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

"Prejudice", we are told, isn't "reasonable". "Race" is an "illogical" or "unscientific" concept. Christians tell us we must "love all others as our brothers" - and sisters in a more ecumenical world. Yet Chief Executives can label entire nations as elements of an "Axis of Evil" and make or threaten war with impunity. And masses of the population support them. Why should this be so? David Berreby sought out philosophers, psychologists and other scholars in an extensive quest for some answers. He found a good many and recounts them in this nearly exhaustive study. In a well organised and captivating account, he weaves together many threads in building a picture of how we view ourselves and others.

Biology tells us that our DNA makes us one with our fellows. Yet, somewhere between conception and our ability to distinguish ourselves from others, we begin to categorise those "others". We may find them acceptable, and join their company. In other cases, we deem the differences unacceptable. "Us" and "Them" become the basis for value judgements. Berreby recognises that the distinctions are in our minds. He asks how they come to be there in the first place. He examines the various forms of prejudice, both positive and negative, in tracing both their histories and manifestations. Heart disease, for example, was once considered more prevalent among the rich and powerful. Now, studies show that those carrying burdens of pressures from "above" feel more stressed. Hence, their bodies react and heart problems follow. Classes of people, often the poor and ill-considered such as the "cagot" peasants in France, were despised and relegated to menial roles in society. Over time, the classification fell into disuse. In Berreby's words, they were "recategorised".

The author traces the mental patterns of how we "type" people. The process involves focussing on particular aspects while ignoring the rest. His favourite example is the motorist stopped by a police officer. The officer turns out to be a dark-skinned female. Does the motorist view the officer as a cop, as an Arab, as a light-skinned African or as a woman? For some of us, by the time we work it out, the ticket has been dispensed! The delay is due to our propensity to carry the "type" in our minds, then select characteristics that seem to fit. We generally select an essential characteristic and focus on that. Skin colour is an obvious "essential", but left-handedness or dress can be just as suitable.

These essentials, he argues, can be reinforced within ourselves, as well. In a famous study, Asian women were set into groups, some reminded that Asians are considered to excel in math, others that women are deficient in those skills. When tested, the ones who believed Asians are superior in math had higher test scores. "Type" reinforcement has many ways of developing and expressing beliefs. The best example of this is the military person. Recruits are trained to shed previously held categories, which are replaced with new values. Society at large dims as new loyalties to the squad are instilled. Sacrifice is raised in merit, and hierarchically, running from one's immediate mates, through the levels of the force and finally the nation as an entity. This training is not easily shed, as one marine demonstrated when he left his drinking chums to chat with a uniformed individual. Their shared experiences were more powerful than the friendship bonds.

How we acquire these in the first place is difficult to assess. It seems that it is essential for our dealing with the world at large. That condition dictates that the process is both universal and in the mind. Berreby offers a fine chapter on the areas of the brain involved in various body processes and emotional states. He briefly discusses the devices that indicate where in the brain various activities are recorded. PET and fMRI scanners are given their due, with some history of how the brain's "modules" were identified. He stresses, however, that seeking a "centre" for categorising others is fruitless. The mind's actions are too widely scattered and diverse. This situation may explain both why we may hold prejudices deeply, but can also shift them to lesser importance or even replace them with a new circumstance. With so many ways to "type" our fellows, emphasis can vary quickly and easily. While we like to think we can "top-down" direct our feelings about somebody, there may be equal signals from "bottom-up" to deflect or override our "reasoned" approach to others. Following this vein, Berreby examines the role of emotion as a driving force for categorising.

Is Berreby aiming to dislodge prejudice from our brains? Nothing so simplistic. Does he think training will deter a child from associating with an errant group? Not likely, since one of his primary examples is that of a group of boys who might have been social and ethnic clones dividing them into hostile groups. The separation grew intense until adults stepped in. Berreby is a realist, and provides a plausible structure for how we view others. Unfortunately, the thrust is sociological rather than cognitive, which is where he might have gained further insights. Although he spoke with many researchers, he ignored Daniel C. Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" which might have provided him with an expanded framework for how the process evolved and now works. While that shortcoming is serious, it doesn't detract from the value of this work's theme. Prejudices are not rigid dogma, and with a little effort we can examine and assess them in ourselves as well as in others. We can rebel against their dictates if we wish. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

12 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Lacks Focus, June 26, 2006

By	J. Butler "A Reader" (USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Us and Them by David Berreby is an attempt to understand the psychology, sociology, and neuroscience of intergroup conflict. As such, it is only partly successful. Berreby begins with a discussion of "human kind" which covers everything from race to nation to a happenstance group of strangers in a woman's restroom. This is an overly broad definition that conflates true social groups with temporary collectives or "aggregates." The former develop identity, structure, and rivalries, while the latter do not. This broad beginning foreshadows a book that tends to lose its focus from chapter to chapter. Berreby leaves his thesis for pages at a time, often to discuss irrelevant though admittedly interesting neuroscience research. Nevertheless, the reader is often left wondering what happened to the tribal mind. Truth be told, neuroscience cannot yet explain the area of group conflict. Don't let yourself be dazzled into persuasion.

In addition to being overly broad and unfocused, at times Berreby is simply wrong. On page 36 he refers to the "flawed" research on similarity and interpersonal attraction, suggesting that people may join a group and then begin to act like them. This may well be true (due to various social influence effects), but the observation that people seek out similar others is one of the most robust and replicated findings in social psychology. Berreby is a little too eager to prove his point, and this leads him to distort and go beyond the evidence throughout the book.

I don't want to be completely negative in this review. Certainly, Berreby is a competent writer, and to some extent, this book fills an important niche. Still, I wish he had gone about it in a different way. There is plenty of good research on group relations that he ignores. His neuroscience approach is clever, but ultimately futile as an explanation.

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars What's wrong with footnote numbers?, December 30, 2006

By	P. J. Jordan (Nashville, TN USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

As an academic researcher and a lawyer, I admit I am biased in favor of a more scholarly presentation. I agree that this book is informative and I have found it helpful as a gateway to the professional literature. However, Berreby has made my task doubly difficult by his inexplicable failure to use footnote numbers for his references, instead organizing the references by page number and phrases at the end of sentences; thus giving no indication in the text that a reference even exists, and forcing the reader to labor mightily to locate his authority. Further, some studies he discusses are not even given a reference -- at the very least, a footnote should indicate the study is unpublished and where it might be located if a person needed it. If this information is summarized in any other book, I would buy it instead of this one.