r/socialpsychology

What do you guys think about the social animals called humans? What was your belief that has not changed about humans, and what do you see as the common patterns in human behavior? If you guys had time to think about it, what do you think most of the people that are with you would be doing? Would it be faking their personality or idealism or anything like that? Also, in general, what do you think about the so-called intelligence of a human mind?

not too crazy of a question, im just curious. whenever someone starts arguing with me, I always find myself smiling and enjoying watching them get more and more frustrated. while most people probably find yelling unpleasant, it's actually quite enjoyable for me. sometimes I even find videos of people arguing on tiktok and just giggle while watching them. idk if this is normal or not, (i assume it isnt), so can someone give me an answer?

Some people seem to take pride in being niche/esoteric/stray from the “norm” while others seem to enjoy sticking to mainstream culture. Why do you think that is?

In this world, there are certain laws that dictate our everyday lives. One of them is the Law of Attraction. An understudied law that you can use to get the things your heart desires.

Before diving deeper into this, let's talk about cats and their correlation to this law. If you've ever owned a cat or been around a domesticated cat, that isn't subjected to trauma. You can notice a pattern in which their behavior is very unorthodox.

If you pick up a cat and lay it on your lap without it having come to you. It will most likely get up and walk away from you after you decide to let it go. Anything you force upon it, you will get the exact opposite from it. If you want the cat not to come close to you, it randomly decides that now I shall be all over this human.

The law of attraction works in a similar way, when you run after anything. It usually runs away from you. Whether it be girls, money, fame, respect, recognition, humor, friendships, "running after something" in this case doesn't mean don't try at all. It means that you need said outcome to occur. The more you need it, the harder it gets to achieve. Very similar to the Binary concept.

So next time you're out on a first date, trying to ask a girl out, trying to get a job, establish a connection with a third party, start a business, essentially next time you decide to have an outcome occur. Remember not to chase but to attract it.

"Don't waste your time chasing butterflies. Mend your garden, and the butterflies will come,"~ Mario Quintana.

This is just in case there's anyone out there who's interested in these works. I'm not a Social Psychologist, but am influenced by the seminal texts. In the late 1980s I had a very stimulating semester in college reading Festinger, Zimbardo, Milgram, etc.

Recently I've read two criticisms of When Prophecy Fails: one, Timothy Jenkins's 2013 Of Social Scientists and Flying Saucers, and 2025's "Debunking 'When Prophecy Fails'", a 15 pager from the Journal of the History of Behavioral Sciences, found here in a PDF.

As an outsider, I understand the critique of methods, especially any duplicity. That said, I wonder if anyone else here has read either one or both of these critiques of Festinger?

I've noticed something interesting in discussion forums.

When someone asks for a big idea or a deep truth, many replies become personal beliefs, life stories, or political opinions instead of answering the actual question.

For example:

Question: "What is one truth that you believe, but you feel most of the world has not yet seen?"

Instead of giving a new idea, many replies become:

"I don't believe in God."

"Social media is bad."

"I was a nurse for years..."

Those may be interesting opinions, but they don't necessarily answer the question.

Why do you think this happens?

Is it because people naturally think in stories rather than abstract ideas? Or is it simply difficult to identify a genuine "big idea"?

The literal shape of someone’s head and how it is psychologically relevant to behavior. I’m genuinely curious.

Lately, I've been wondering whether social media actually changed human nature or simply exposed it.

We like to think of ourselves as independent thinkers, yet most of us spend an incredible amount of energy trying to fit in. We talk about individuality, but disagreement often feels strangely personal, almost like a threat.

Th internet was supposed to connect us and broaden our perspectives. Instead, it often seems to push people into tribes—not because we're evil or irrational, but because belonging has always mattered to us more than we admit.

Maybe Reddit, Twitter, and every other platform aren't creating these behaviors. Maybe they're just revealing something that was always there: our need for approval, our fear of rejection, and the uncomfortable possibility that many of our opinions are shaped by the people around us.

I'm not even sure this is a bad thing. Humans have always learned from groups. But it raises an interesting question:

I'm exhausted...
Are your opinions actually yours, or mostly inherited from the people around you?