In this blog post, we’ll examine the relationships formed between altruistic and selfish people, their characteristics, and the limitations of the “Birds of a Feather” Hypothesis.
Introduction
There are people in the world who do good deeds without expecting anything in return. Let’s look at an example. A is an officer in the band club at OO University and usually takes charge of the club’s odd jobs. Even though he receives no separate compensation for his work, he always carries out his duties diligently.
Is that really the case?
Yet, even though he does this work without any compensation, he doesn’t suffer any particular loss, nor is he teased by fellow students for being a fool. On the contrary, other students help him with his tasks. Why does this happen?
Humans are social animals. It is difficult to survive without interacting with others. Even animals, if separated from their herd, tend to wander aimlessly and are easily preyed upon by predators. People, too, live by communicating with one another within society. In the process of communication, when opinions align, both parties may benefit; however, it is not uncommon to experience conflict and suffer losses due to opposing views. If conflict intensifies, it can lead to confrontation, potentially causing mutual harm and damage. Since almost no one welcomes such harm, the likelihood of negative relationships forming among people who see eye to eye is relatively low.
The statement mentioned earlier—“almost no one likes to suffer harm”—allows us to categorize people into two broad tendencies. There are selfish people in the world, and there are altruistic people. Logically speaking, it is natural for selfish people to associate with other selfish people, and for altruistic people to associate with other altruistic people. However, when a person first meets another, it is difficult to easily judge whether that person is self-interested or altruistic based solely on appearance or a few words. Nevertheless, people generally tend to judge those who cause them harm as self-interested. Therefore, people perceive those they believe will benefit them as altruistic and naturally grow closer to them, while conversely, they keep their distance from those they judge will cause them harm.
“Birds of a Feather Flock Together”: Altruistic and Selfish People
This shows that altruistic people tend to associate with other altruistic people, while selfish people tend to associate with other selfish people. This phenomenon, where people with similar tendencies gravitate toward one another, is called “birds of a feather flock together.”
However, there is an interesting point here. Because altruistic people respect and care for one another, they naturally maintain good relationships. So, can selfish people get along well with one another? Of course, this is possible in the short term. However, if we consider the meanings of the terms “altruistic” and “selfish,” we can anticipate that relationships among selfish people are unlikely to last long.
Because altruistic people respect and care for one another, they are less likely to cause harm to each other. In contrast, it is difficult for such relationships to form among selfish people. Altruistic people satisfy each other’s interests by acting for the benefit of others, but selfish people prioritize only their own interests and therefore do not consider the interests of others. Whether altruistic or selfish, people ultimately do not want to continue associating with those who do not benefit them. Therefore, while selfish people can get along with one another in the short term, it is difficult to maintain such relationships in the long term.
Furthermore, relationships between altruistic and selfish people are also unlikely to last long. Altruistic people act in the interests of selfish people, but selfish people do not reciprocate. Ultimately, altruistic people conclude that associating with selfish people is detrimental to them and sever the relationship. This is because almost no one enjoys suffering a loss. As a result, selfish people find it difficult to maintain stable relationships even with those who share their tendencies, and as they drift apart from altruistic people, social interaction can gradually become more difficult.
The “Birds of a Feather” Phenomenon Among Altruistic and Selfish People
On the other hand, this “birds of a feather” phenomenon does not always lead to positive outcomes. There is certainly a benefit in that when people with similar traits gather, conflicts and clashes decrease, leading to social stability. However, in reality, diverse thoughts and values always coexist. If only altruistic people continue to associate with one another, similar ways of thinking may be repeated, eventually leading to the entrenchment of uniform thinking. In other words, everyone might end up thinking alike, making it difficult to discover novelty or creativity.
Furthermore, while “birds of a feather flock together” helps reduce conflict by bringing like-minded people together, it can simultaneously exacerbate conflict between different groups. For example, the relationship between large supermarkets and traditional markets is difficult to maintain harmoniously because their interests clash. This is because large supermarkets take away customers and revenue from traditional markets. Consequently, traditional market vendors try to cooperate with one another to counter the large supermarkets. While cohesion is strong within each group because people with similar interests gather there, conflict arises between the groups. Thus, the “birds of a feather flock together” phenomenon has both positive and negative aspects.
Interpretation of the Case Study Through the “Birds of a Feather Flock Together” Hypothesis
Let’s explain the case of A presented at the beginning using the “birds of a feather flock together” hypothesis. A’s willingness to take on the club’s menial tasks without any compensation is an altruistic act for the benefit of the club members. If A consistently demonstrates this behavior, other students will come to perceive A as a diligent and conscientious person. Eventually, the assessment that “A is a student who is usually conscientious and has a strong spirit of service” will naturally take root among the club members.
As a result, even if A makes a mistake during a performance or similar event, other students are more likely to be understanding and forgiving. Furthermore, when A takes on new initiatives, more people will be willing to help. Therefore, while it may seem at first glance that A is at a disadvantage, in the long run, A will earn the consideration, respect, and trust of others. Ultimately, A’s altruistic behavior yields greater benefits.
Conclusion
In conclusion, “birds of a feather flock together” is like Janus, the two-faced god. On one hand, it helps people pursue mutual benefits and reduce internal conflicts within a group; on the other hand, it can reinforce uniform thinking within the group and intensify conflicts between groups. Thus, while “birds of a feather flock together” has aspects that are helpful for navigating society, it also has clear limitations.
To overcome these limitations, we must first acknowledge diversity in society. When people with different inclinations and values coexist, society can break free from uniformity and develop a wider range of perspectives and creativity. Furthermore, to reduce intergroup conflict, we must recognize that society is composed not only of individuals but also of diverse groups. This is because cooperation and coexistence across society as a whole cannot be achieved if relationships between individuals are harmonious but conflict between groups persists.
