Collective Mental Models and Us vs. Them Dynamics
Groups can share mental models that define who belongs and whose claims count. Dawson describes how these models can become an us-versus-them outlook in religion, citizenship, and politics, while distinguishing group identity from hostility toward outsiders.
THE IDEA
Collective identity and competing claims
Dawson uses mental models (MM) to describe shared assumptions about the world. Within the framework he calls Objective Reality (OR), a collective can retain the concerns of individual identity: status, control, ownership, and being right. His label FMM OR appears in this discussion, though the excerpt does not expand FMM.
A group can build its identity around an exclusive claim. A religious community might claim access to absolute truth and dismiss rival beliefs. A political movement might describe its own system as civilized and its opponents as backward. The shared model helps members recognize one another, but it can also make outsiders seem less worthy of consideration.
Territorial claims and citizenship provide another example. States distinguish citizens from noncitizens and set rules for entry and residence. The specific documents and permissions depend on the state and the person’s circumstances. The relevant point here is the boundary between members and outsiders, rather than a universal rule about identity cards or visas.
Dawson links exclusionary group identities to colonialism, slavery, revolution, and war. These examples illustrate his concern about using a collective identity to justify domination. They do not make identity a complete explanation of those events, and a shared identity need not be hostile to other groups.
Individual agency can serve useful purposes as well. The source identifies four aims:
- Defend a position and resist wrongdoing.
- Avoid being controlled by others.
- Manage how others perceive us.
- Govern our own conduct rather than submit to domination.
The practical question is how a group’s model affects its treatment of others. Does it permit disagreement and cooperation, or does it turn every difference into evidence that an outsider is inferior?
When to use it
Analyzing political polarization and party loyalty.
Understanding religious conflicts and interfaith dialogue.
Evaluating immigration policies and national identity debates.
Examining colonial and post-colonial power dynamics.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Religious Claim to Absolute Truth
One religious entity claims to hold absolute truth while accusing others of spreading falsehoods, identifying itself back to God and labeling others' deities as 'gods'.
National Identity and Citizenship
A state distinguishes citizens from noncitizens and sets entry or residence requirements. These rules illustrate a formal boundary of membership; the documents required vary by jurisdiction and circumstance.
Political System Branding
One political system claims to be civil while branding competitors as backward or barbaric, using laws to justify colonialism and slavery.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How does your group identity influence your perception of other groups?
In what situations do you see 'us vs them' dynamics, and how can they be balanced?
Can collective mental models be used for positive outcomes? Give an example.
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Thinking in Systems and Mental Models Think Like a Super Thinker (Dawson, Marcus P)