# Alike and Dissimilar By:: [[Ross Jackson]] 2024-06-23 The human animal is complex and contradictory. Fragile and resilient. Dependent and resourceful. Humans are both competitive and social. These inherent contradictions make attempting to improve things problematic. If something works to enhance the competitiveness of human nature it works against cultivating the social. If something works to build upon society, it inhibits competition. The phrase “too far” is frequently used in the policy critique, as in the case of “this was good in theory, but it has gone too far.” This seems to be the unavoidable risk of policy related to humans. Because humans are inherently contradictory, any policy will only address part of humanity and, therefore, go too far regarding the inhibited attributes. One can apply analysis to these questions. The boundary conditions can be established. The space between all and nothing can be defined. A great deal of insight can also be produced related to the costs and consequences associated with the various positions. Analysis can’t determine where a society “should” reside along the spectrum. There is no clear optimum. There are only various positions that do some things well and others horribly. One can mix and match the pros and cons. Humans are alike and dissimilar. Which is most apparent is as much about abstraction as it is about the people being observed. Solidarity is not about homogeneity. If solidarity requires conformity the cost is too high. We are unique individuals—each worthy of celebration and delight. We are alike and dissimilar in this respect. Solidarity offers not an opportunity to lose oneself but an opportunity to contribute to our shared humanity. Formalization will tend to fail because it can only be partial. An organic, natural modification approach is needed. This requires focus not formalization. #### Related Items [[The Human Condition]] [[Analytics]] [[Politics]] [[Policies]] [[Optimization]] [[Solidarity]] [[Society]] [[Competition]]