This post originally appeared on one of our favorite blogs, OWNI, 25 January, 2011.

Without indulging into the theories developed by radical sociobiologists, we can reasonably hypothesize that the development of the ego, vanity, and a sense of self-importance were more or less the result of evolutionary adaptations needed for our species’ survival.

THE NATURAL NEED TO EMERGE FROM THE CROWD
In prehistoric times, group survival depended on the level of strength and stamina individuals had in an insecure world where they were powerless against nature. They had to be strong enough to persevere over harsh weather conditions, long migrations, and other dangers in this savage world. They also had to be fit enough to compete against other males for females, thus perpetuating their contribution to the gene pool.

More than just mere strength was needed for survival: The cohesion and solidarity of the groupallowed people to defend themselves against larger animals and organize collective hunts. In turn the group provided food security for everyone, justifying why collective actions were instated as an efficient method for survival.

The final factor in group survival, and according to Darwin the differentiation between humans and other species, is intelligence. This gave way to the development of better weapons for self-defense, the ingenious invention of the needle for making clothes, and the discovery of fire. Intelligence revolutionized man’s potential by making him the master of nature instead of its slave.

In modern times the problem of immediate survival has been replaced by another hazard: the necessity to stand out from the crowd. Thus, people need a more refined skill set that is beyond basic communicative intelligence.

NEW COMMUNICATIONS AS A DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR
Our lifestyles are becoming increasingly urbanized. Human activity is focused on industrialization, which geographically constrains individuals to the city life. We are constantly surrounded by a sea of other people.

Contemporary life emphasizes a uniformity in lifestyles which is attributed to the homogeneous nature of professional activities. The clone-like employee market has replaced the uniqueness of small trades and vendors, and the only way to be reminded of the incredible economic diversity that can exist is through a trip to India.

This standardization has further been fostered by the “consumer society,” which relies on the mass productions of goods for survival. Who doesn’t have an Ikea “Billy” bookshelf in their house? Our consumer society encourages homogeneity and has sustained through other mechanisms that promote social differentiation (This has been demonstrated by the works of French sociologists Jean Baurillard in “La société de consommation” and Pierre Bourdieu in “La distinction”).

In the last few decades we have created new information technologies such as web 2.0 and social networking sites, leading to an explosion of global interactions. These new technologies are becoming a significant tool with our need to distinguish ourselves in economic, political, and sexual competitions.

With every Facebook status update and every blog post, we are expressing that we are different and unique. We are proving we have value as an object of social and cultural consumption. When having a conversation in everyday life, it is crucial that we are “interesting,” “funny,” or “original.”

However, maintaining this level of uniqueness requires a significant amount of energy. We must become more and more cultured so we don’t run out of things to say. We visit museums, go to the movies, makes crafts and home repairs to cultivate our creativity. The reality is that we must retain the the attention of others, but this social paradigm makes it increasingly difficult to gauge other people’s attention.

THE COMPETITION FOR ATTENTION
Driven by our need for social recognition, we are compelled towards constant action. There must always be something to do: work, read, watch TV, eat, sleep. The fleeting thought of non-action is immediately dismissed (contrary to other cultures, notably Buddhism). I suggest that you watch (or watch again) “Kennedy et Moi” with the great Jean-Pierre Bacri.

Being constantly on-the-go creates a deficit in the attention we give to others. We consolidate our emotional investments and our time for socialization, limiting ourselves to our family, close friends, and coworkers. Thus ensues vicious cycle: the more we are active in the name of socialization, the more scarce global attention becomes and the less likely it becomes to experience real socialization.

Relationships between colleagues benefit from this arrangement because attention becomes “forced.” This probably explains why the bonds which develop in the work environment are so strong, either in a negative or positive sense.  There is increasingly more emotional confusions between personal and private relationships, as there are more opportunities for friendly interactions and disappointing encounters.

Then there is also the addition of new media, the new cultural practices. The explosion of video games, computers and social networks are piled on top of older technologies such as the television, radio and newspaper. These new cultural practices squander the time that could be used for real socialization. “You’re not going to put down your Xbox console for a while, are you?”,  ”Oh, don’t call me on Thursday, that’s the day I watch my favorite TV show.”

Patrice Le Lay from TF1 preached about the “the brain time available,” which he sold directly to advertisers. While the phrase created a bit of a stir, it was an honest statement; all he did was say aloud the concept which every media company knows to be true.

THE EGO: A DIFFERENT STRATEGY FOR ATTENTION
The mechanisms are not new, but our changing lifestyles and the explosion of new media tools amplifies this phenomenon. We must emphasize this change in order to emerge from the crowd, and because the new instruments afforded to us encourages this behavior. Recently developed electronic tools include blogs, social networking sites, the diversity of communication platforms (Flick’r, Youtube, WAT), interactive sites (Rue89, 20 minutes, Le Post). Furthermore online newspapers are now allowing comments on their websites. The door to the ego and self-expression is officially open.

The new credo is no longer “know how,” but rather just “know.” The Christian values of humility are no longer effective traits in social society. Instead we must keep pushing ourselves above the crowd to have a chance of snatching valuable attention. This is the downfall of many young journalists, who think they can just get by on “personal branding“(which I wrote about in a previous post).

Even if the Internet (like previous information technologies) fails to truly democratize culture and knowledge, at least it is turning into a good platform to promote talent. This accessible system permits individuals to break away from the crowd, including quality bloggers (Maitre Eolas, Hugues Serraf, Versac)  and entertainers (Vinvin, Mathieu Sicard). The art of public speaking, which was previously dominated by media elites, can be used by anyone who wants to prove their value and stand out.

THE RACE FOR ATTENTION CREATES FAKE EMOTIONS
The result of this social game is the generation of false statements at emotions in response to the demands imposed on us by society. The rules of the game oblige us to have a façade of happiness, because others value an individual who approaches problems with a smile on their face (but maybe not as much in their brains). This mechanism was correlated with the creation of Japanese Kawii culture (Also a good article on the subject is “l’euphorie perpétuelle” by Pascal Bruckner).
– It’s the permanent care-free state-of-mind, “gone fishing.”
– It’s the exaggeration of positive statements, “I had a GREAAAAAAT weekend!
– It’s the sugar-coated words, “You’re really amazing.”
– It’s the digital humor; to “LOL” is much more trendy than being serious and boring.

On the other hand, maybe cynicism is really a type of symbolic domination over individuals and events. Mocking demonstrates a sense of being external and superior to another object or person.

A NEW SOURCE OF INEQUALITY
In this competition for limited attention, not all individuals have the same chances of success. Only the most interesting, funny, and charming people are spared from the harsh rules of the game.

The people who are mediocre, uncultured, boring, and lack a sense of humor are the first social genocide victims. Like most realities concerning social economic standing, the socially disadvantaged who are uneducated and have not experienced higher culture are the ones that fall behind. It’s this group who don’t see cultural films, don’t go to modern art museums, and thus can’t hold an acceptable conversation or have real value in the eyes of the middle and upper class.

The “no-conversation” community can comfort the socially disadvantaged group. These are the people who strive to renovate the world through unconventional bits of information gathered here or there. These are the youth who congregate on street corners, speak their own language, and follow their own rituals of belonging which reassures they are locked into their own world. ReadEdmond Husserl’s  ”phénoménologiste de l’esprit.”

New media is not responsible for the nature of the socially-obsessed ego. Yet the homogeneity of lifestyles, the aggregation of people into city life, and new technologies truly amplifies this phenomenon. So I emerge exactly as who I am…