Why do we gossip?
I have noticed, within all generations, there seems to be an overwhelming amount of gossip. I've distanced myself from numerous people to avoid getting caught in it, and I wonder as to why. Why do they gossip? Why do they talk ill of others or talk about everyone else's life? What is so good about it that it must take up your precious time on this Earth?
I understand it makes you feel nicer, that you are somwhat above other people, but why is that so important? It's such an empty investment I don't see why everyone keeps on with it? Why can't they do something practical rather than gossip?
I understand it makes you feel nicer, that you are somwhat above other people, but why is that so important? It's such an empty investment I don't see why everyone keeps on with it? Why can't they do something practical rather than gossip?
Comments (28)
What exactly are you asking: why people do the things they do? Isn't that a rather strange question?
Sometimes it's a way to live vicariously through that person, who might have a life that's unlike any you'll ever have--a lot of celebrity gossip is of that nature.
Those are just two examples of reasons people can be interested in it.
Quoting Terrapin Station
When people do things in life or have experiences that are different to our own, it piques our interest. This is how we learn about value structures in the world. How people we value with similar experiences to us value these alternative experiences, and why, helps us to build the value structures of our reality.
So some people share this information in order to ascertain how others feel about it - how others fit into their value structures. Others share how they feel about the information in order to position themselves and/or the subject of the information in the value structures of others.
We need it in order to gain an understanding of the reality around us, and to attempt to understand our position in the world!
Thankyou :)
You're going to get a lot of different answers to that question; I think first of all, we need to define the term gossip: does it include any mention whatsoever of others? Or is it a narrower way of talking about others?
As others have stated before, gossiping enables us to socially fit in; we learn what is acceptable behaviour so we do not end up being a topic of gossip. Why do we as humans find it thrilling to "spill the tea?" Learning of another's misfortune gives us a sense of schadenfreude, "at least my life isn't as bad as theirs."
So where do we draw the line between fueling our need for superiority and trampling on another's dignity and right to privacy?
Very interesting discussion you have going here...
1 Gossiping satisfies a need to feel superior to or better off than others. "Guess what: Bob met a nice girl" is not gossip; "Guess what: Bob has herpes," is.
2. Gossiping can also be a way of forming alliances against the person gossiped about by sharing the juicy tidbits with someone else, and it can also be a way of taking an indirect dig at the person with whom the gossip is shared: "Do you know what Bob said about you? He said you're ugly and stupid. Can you believe it??"
3. As implied in # 1, gossiping takes our minds off our own miseries. So Bob tells his co-workers, "Guess what: Joe has contracted HIV."
4. Gossip is a way of spreading lies and distortions: "Guess what: Joe got HIV from having sex with a gerbil."
If you ever wanna spark a interesting discussion question the obvious - then you get some interesting answers, it becomes a seed of thought which grows into a tree of different ideas and new questions. Give it a go!
I see your point. That's one layer of truth
Fuck the people that don't get fun out of either.
Gossip, whether malicious or ‘harmlessly’ passing comment, contains value positioning information. I think the thrill is in recognising the capacity we have to manipulate this aspect of reality: more specifically, how the words we use in sharing information can change where we are positioned according to the value structures of the world in relation to those around us.
Quoting uncanni
I think when we define ‘gossip’ with negative examples only, we fail to take into account the necessity of value positioning information in how we make sense of the world and our place in it. It’s easy enough to alter all of these above comments to positive examples of ‘gossip’ that edify the subject rather than put them down.
“Bob met a nice girl” is as much an example of value positioning information as “Bob has herpes”. When we say they’re not the same type of information, I think we’re missing an opportunity to understand why we gossip and how we can alter its potential to cause harm.
Your language, reflecting society's natural judgement, makes it sound criminal. I wonder whether you could share your thoughts about how that fits with your idea that it is a "very human entity"?
But that is not contained in the definition of gossip: gossip is, by definition, not harmless. You want to change the definition of gossip.
I disagree - gossip, by definition, is idle talk about other people’s lives that may not necessarily be confirmed as true. It is neither harmful nor harmless by nature.
I respectfully disagree with your disagreement :smile: You chose the first definition that pops up, but gossip is generally characterized by various pejorative characteristics like distortion, unvalidated heresay, and intrusion into and disregard for privacy.
I don't believe that any statement about another person is gossip--and I doubt that that's what you're trying to say, either. Here's an article that provides a different perspective on gossip's ability to give us "cultural competence": https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.111
My concise definition of gossip: whenever I'm saying something about someone that I wouldn't say in front of them, it's gossip.
Quoting uncanni
Quoting uncanni
Everything else I agree with.
Anything that is not of truth but carries the weight of truth, is harmful.
Agreed. But I never said gossip wasn’t harmful, just not necessarily harmful.
First, I think definition is important, otherwise we might be confounded invalidly. So, would you agree with the definition from uncanni:
Quoting uncanni
I think it is a very good definition, because it shows that the conscience is condemning the speech for fear of consequences, or that the possessor of the content is afraid that the power of the content is threatened by the opportunity of the subject to contribute contrary fact.