What Makes People Tick: The Three Hidden Worlds of Settlers, Prospectors and Pioneers Paperback – Illustrated, 1 Sep 2011
|New from||Used from|
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Customers who bought this item also bought
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Because it simply ignores other, similar and influential approaches that actually overlap quite a bit with the theory of "Values Modes" creating 3 'worlds' of Settlers, Propsectors and Pioneers and apply them in similar ways, and about which an awful lot more has been written. It mentions some other research, but usually only to bolster the 'Values Modes' approach rather than to explore what other social scientists have said.
Three obvious examples:
Cultural Theory - originating in the "grid-group" cultural-anthropology theories of Mary Douglas and applied to politics by numerous writers
Competing Values Theory - originated in organisational studies by Quinn and Cameron and applied widely in that field
Relational Models Theory - again originating in anthropology developed by Fiske and again expanded by many writers since (you can read my take on this one here https://colinrtalbot.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/human-nature-our-four-human-social-instincts/ )
The point I have made elsewhere is that these theories are very close to one another - all the above three use four (rather than 3 categories) that are remarkably similar. This suggest there is something "there" but we'll only start to make progress if, instead of researching these as separate strands we start to look for agreement between them (see my "Theories of Performance", Oxford, 2010).
This book unfortunately 'hypes' one (commercialised) approach to 'what makes people tick' rather than searching for explanations. Its a pity because it is of interest
One final trivial but annoying point: my copy of this started falling apart as soon as i opened it. Pretty shoddy production 'values'.
Why is it a waste of time trying to present facts to climate change deniers? Think of the millions of hours wasted on this exercise and the megawatts of anger and fustration caused thereby. This books explains it.
How come two people who had the same schooling in the same country, use the same systems of reason and logic, can disagree fundamentally about something?
Why do some people identify themselves as left wing and some people right wing, when what they hold dear, what is important to them, is practically the same? Heck, why do we even bother with right and left when the bit in common so much more important?
Why do some people prefer team sports like football and others prefer individual sports like tennis?
Why is the truth an insufficient tool of persuasion?
Why do some people have very orderly gardens, devoid of any ecological value.
Why do some people need to own a Porsche, even though it's just a piece of fast metal painted red.
Why do Americans eat organic food because of health and Europeans because of the environment?
What would it take to get people to love the natural world?
Why are so many environmental campaigns useless?
Why do green products take so long to become mainstream?
How can we be effective if we want to make the world a bit better?
The book doesn't exactly present answers to these specific questions, but it equips you to think about these questions and then get a working explanation.
The book is also brilliant because it is deep and does all the above, but it is very readable and engaging. I have trouble getting through most non-fiction books because they get boring after they have said the main thing in the first few pages anyway. This is not one of those.
Anyone curious about how to make the world a bit better should read this first. It is not and does not claim to be an explanation of all human behaviour (obviously), but it provides a big chunk of that.
The one downside is that it tends to give itself away as a rather secular approach, hinting that religious campaigners will by by nature fundamentalist or 'Settler' because of their traditional social values. I don't find this persuasive given the sheer breadth within faith-based campaigning organisations, and my own personal knowledge of Christians/Muslims/others who span the three main groups. This needs further developed insights and perhaps consultation with these groups to reflect their diversity within the model.
Otherwise a massive thumbs up - very insightful for those of us who want to make a difference by reaching mainstreamers in society not just the die-hard campaigners!!