Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Building Community - social behavior

[THESHLIFE (THESHLIFE]

> To get the people in this country, interested in the idea, it has to have a
> positive image.  People, generally, not always, but generally are afraid of
> something odd or different.  The image of cohousing has to be good and has
to
> be normal. - Yes, what is normal.  Let's just call it normally accepted.
> 
Promise, this is the only thing I'll say about the issue.  Religion is
more normal than not-religion in the US.  Check the stats.  Disclaimer --
I don't promote normality.  I'm not quite Emerson on self-reliance, but
it's close.  And I refuse to become a mainline Protestant to become normal 
and acceptable, which is -- I believe -- what it takes in this country.
[uh...  Unitarian Universalists aren't mainline, are we? ;]
>>>>> Reply from author__--__--__-
--I agree that normal may partially reside in religion.  Being clearer on my
opinion - Let me say that it must be 'generic'. Cohousing must have a generic
image.  Having no specific religious ties.  If people in a community form
around a belief that's fine. Just don't label it Religious cohousing.
I'm anti-religious, and believe religion is way more bad than it is good.
 You can discuss this notion with me one on one off the L if you'd like.


> I'm getting deep here, but here goes.  
> All higher levels of animals on this earth are social.  Primates, dolphin,
> even canine and feline etc.  

I can't help it.  My background is in anthropology...

You define "all higher levels of animals" circularity as being social.
You are describing a stratification of taxonomy that was promoted at the
end of the 19th century and has not been well-accepted since.  Since we
are social animals, some humans view other social animals as being somehow 
superior to non-social animals.  What you are referring to is a fairly
arbitrary subclass of animals that are social mammals.  In a wider
context, they include 
prairie dogs and a large number of rodents that are considered vermin.
Bears, which are arguably more intelligent than dogs and cats, or at
least on par, are not social.  Ditto wolverines, raccoons, etc.  It
all depends on what you are testing for.

Obviously if you are testing for social skills, your social mammals 
come out high on the list.
Shava
>>>>> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- Reply be the author
You're nit picking here.  I was stating that we as humans possess the
instinct for social behavior.  It's part of us.  Yes, there's a wide range of
animals that are social.

The point is, that we've moved away from being social as a result of urban
sprawl and other reasons.  Cohousing rekindles our instinct to be social.

Gary 
southernmost cohousing