Being aware of status has caused me to either 1. make status-stealing moves more often or 2. be more aware and conscious of making status-stealing movies, with the practical upshot of both being that social interactions have become a little less enjoyable for other people.
How did you study status? My biggest single source of information has been Keith Johnstone’s book Impro (although I haven’t actually done any improv, too scary), and I started liking social interactions more than before. They feel less confusing and arbitrary; more like a game that can be mutually enjoyable, and in which both participants can “raise their score.”
This hasn’t been a problem for me, so my experience doesn’t include the benefit of understanding social interaction more. It seems likely that if I had been confused, I’d have recommended learning about status instead of recommending against it.
The Office according to The Office, and Robert Greene’s The 48 Laws of Power.
These only really apply to organized hierarchies, though. When people talk about “status” mattering in human interactions, they mean a combination of perceived power, influence, impressiveness and the like, plus instinctual dominance-submissiveness interactions. Formal hierarchies in a complex organization are a distinct matter, although they do influence status in the former sense.
Why do you recommend against it?
Being aware of status has caused me to either 1. make status-stealing moves more often or 2. be more aware and conscious of making status-stealing movies, with the practical upshot of both being that social interactions have become a little less enjoyable for other people.
Well, don’t do that then.
My kingdom for complete causal control over my actions!
That can be an easy excuse for not doing that then.
How did you study status? My biggest single source of information has been Keith Johnstone’s book Impro (although I haven’t actually done any improv, too scary), and I started liking social interactions more than before. They feel less confusing and arbitrary; more like a game that can be mutually enjoyable, and in which both participants can “raise their score.”
This hasn’t been a problem for me, so my experience doesn’t include the benefit of understanding social interaction more. It seems likely that if I had been confused, I’d have recommended learning about status instead of recommending against it.
As for how I studied it: Overcoming Bias posts on the matter, The Office according to The Office, and Robert Greene’s The 48 Laws of Power.
These only really apply to organized hierarchies, though. When people talk about “status” mattering in human interactions, they mean a combination of perceived power, influence, impressiveness and the like, plus instinctual dominance-submissiveness interactions. Formal hierarchies in a complex organization are a distinct matter, although they do influence status in the former sense.
also being depressed about human interaction.