Rituals And Traditions: It Takes A Tribe

“Rituals and Traditions; It Takes a Tribe,” written by David Berreby and “Indians: Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History” written by Jane Tompkins, both exemplify a typical controversial topic in the United States of America today. The US prides there self on the basis of freedom, and how Americans are made up of individuals with backgrounds from all around the world. Many consider the US to be a “melting pot”, a society where cultures are just blended together and not recognized fully on their own, where as others consider the US to be a “salad bowl”, where people of international cultures hold fast to their traditions and practices and coexist with the cultures around them. Both authors of the readings propose that generally speaking,

the human race as a whole in today’s age coincides with others whom share similarities, but ironically individuals hold different worldviews and personal opinions on some matters.

Tompkins and Berreby share both corresponding and deviating points in their works that keeps each viewpoint on opposite ends of the spectrum, yet perfectly balanced.
In “Rituals and Traditions; It Takes a Tribe,” Berreby proposes that groups and beliefs are naturally created and they exist at the expense of another, thus creating “us” vs “them”; similar to the analogy of the salad bowl, with a society made up of this idea. In “Indians: Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History” Tompkins discusses the history of groups and how they depict the issues that are usually made by alternate points of views. Tomkins feels that history is vital, yet understudies of history ought to be mindful that the perspectives are skewed to their own particular judgments, which in a way is a reverse “melting pot”, because individuals are independent on their own regardless of group; “because history is bias, one must use their own judgment when studying historic occupancy”. Berreby argues people have a common need to generalize one another, and which variables may emphasis the procedure. Regardless of age, people tend to feel the need to acquire a group to maintain a personal comfort level of their own. When attending college, students will

maintain their niche by joining a sorority or fraternity while others tend to be drawn to the musical or sports side (4-5). Berreby argues that humans attracted to a group tend to stick with their group. When individuals see that they've been partitioned into gatherings, they'll act as needs be, regardless of the possibility that they realize the divisions are as useless (4). Tompkins clarifies “every point of view has contradictory facts” and often there is a theme and ‘we’ (Native Americans) have a disconnect between what is right/true. Berreby goes on to say that groups cannot change the fundamental fact that everyone views the world differently due to their own experiences (#). Tompkins agrees with Berreby by saying it is biological function to form groups, and the groups created exist at the expense of another, thus creating “us” and “tribe”, but alternating from being inside and out of social groups when individuals have different world views creates a divide which natural blends all together. Berreby shows that a university raises competitive spirit and therefore tribalism among people (9). Subsequently, Berreby brings up the topic of racism and how people tend to fall into categorizing. For instance, individuals who go to an exceptionally prestigious college will naturally acquire regard from companions in light of the fact that he is connected with a more elite class college (1-2). To conclude his points, Berreby writes that we all have this feeling of “us” that we relate it to a feeling of “them”(2).
Both authors discuss the importance of the need to find their niche group but they discuss the way they are accumulated in different ways. Independence and acceptance, having a place to belong, are all vital human necessities. Berreby mentions “tribe” so frequently because he wants to focus on humanity as a whole and how every aspect of oneself is ranked. Berreby shows with his repetition of the word “tribe” that just like in the history of tribal groups, people do this to conform to the beliefs and rituals of their leaders, and don’t think for themselves due to the comfort in belonging somewhere. This is significant because historically, tribes were considered to be a group or niche that holds similar beliefs and follows one leader, just like it is today with sorority, fraternities, musicians and athletes. Students will join the different "tribes" of the school in order to feel as though they are a part of something and to fulfill their need to belong. When they have satisfied their need, they unconsciously act how they think they should in order to fit in. Each “tribe” or club, group of individuals is an ingredient in the salad bowl analogy, where as simultaneously each individual is innately independently opinionated which makes everyone analogous in the societal “melting pot”. We use groups to exclude but we also use groups to include. People use this tactic as a way to be part of a group and to define us in a way they feel comfortable.
Specifically narrowing in on the US, the American culture regularly arranges individuals according to how other persons, tending to be social elites, say they should. Some people put an emphasis on gathering characters, when in actuality; perception of character is not formed by own judgment. Thus, more people turn into a false version of themselves, an artificial identity, to simply act and think based on ideas far from their own. This is not to say being a part of a culture, because although many peoples in cultures hold fast to their traditions and practices while keeping independent opinions separate from their cultures. Allowing admittance into a group this false sense of self becomes one’s reality, including taking on whatever values and beliefs the majority of the groups hold. Both Berreby and Tompkins distribute both analogous and conflicting points in their writings but overall both viewpoints circulate to agree that society is mostly made up of individuals whom are instinctively opinionated with cause of being naturally independent, yet this does not directly associate with an individual’s choice to join a “tribe” or group of choice with other individual’s with similar interests.