Editing Individualism (section)

== Individualism and society ==
Individualism holds that a person taking part in society attempts to learn and discover what their own interests are on a personal basis, without a presumed following of the interests of a societal structure (an individualist need not be an [[egoist]]). The individualist does not necessarily follow one particular philosophy. They may create an amalgamation of elements of many philosophies, based on personal interests in particular aspects that they find of use. On a societal level, the individualist participates on a personally structured political and moral ground. Independent thinking and opinion is a necessary trait of an individualist. [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], claims that his concept of [[general will]] in ''[[The Social Contract]]'' is not the simple collection of individual wills and that it furthers the interests of the individual (the constraint of law itself would be beneficial for the individual, as the lack of respect for the law necessarily entails, in Rousseau's eyes, a form of [[ignorance]] and submission to one's [[Passion (emotion)|passions]] instead of the preferred [[wikt:autonomy|autonomy]] of [[reason]]).

Individualism versus collectivism is a common dichotomy in [[Cross-cultural studies|cross-cultural research]]. Global comparative studies have found that the world's cultures vary in the degree to which they emphasize individual autonomy, [[freedom]] and initiative (individualistic traits), respectively [[conformity]] to group norms, maintaining traditions and [[Obedience (human behavior)|obedience]] to in-group authority (collectivistic traits).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Santos |first1=Henri C. |last2=Varnum |first2=Michael E. W. |last3=Grossmann |first3=Igor |title=Global Increases in Individualism |journal=[[Psychological Science]] |date=2017 |volume=28 |issue=9 |pages=1228–1239 |doi=10.1177/0956797617700622|pmid=28703638 |s2cid=206588771 |url=https://psyarxiv.com/hynwh/ }}</ref> Cultural differences between individualism and collectivism are differences in degrees, not in kind.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Minkov|first1=Michael|last2=Dutt|first2=Pinaki|last3=Schachner|first3=Michael|last4=Morales|first4=Oswaldo|last5=Sanchez|first5=Carlos|last6=Jandosova|first6=Janar|last7=Khassenbekov|first7=Yerlan|last8=Mudd|first8=Ben|year=2017|title=A revision of Hofstede's individualism-collectivism dimension|journal=Cross Cultural & Strategic Management|volume=24|issue=3|pages=3|doi=10.1108/ccsm-11-2016-0197|issn=2059-5794}}</ref> Cultural individualism is strongly correlated with [[Lists of countries by GDP per capita|GDP per capita]]<ref>{{Cite book|last=Inglehart|first=Ronald F.|title=Cultural Evolution|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-1-108-61388-0|pages=40|chapter=Chapter 3. Global Cultural Patterns|doi=10.1017/9781108613880}}</ref> and [[venture capital]] investments.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gantenbein |first1=Pascal |last2=Kind |first2=Axel |last3=Volonte|first3=Christophe |title=Individualism and Venture Capital: A Cross-Country Study |journal=Management International Review |volume=59 |issue=5 |pages=741–777 |date=2019 |doi=10.1007/s11575-019-00394-7 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The cultures of economically developed regions such as Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Takano|first1=Yohtaro|last2=Osaka|first2=Eiko|year=1999|title=An unsupported common view: Comparing Japan and the U.S. on individualism/collectivism|journal=Asian Journal of Social Psychology|volume=2|issue=3|pages=311–341|doi=10.1111/1467-839x.00043|issn=1367-2223}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Takano|first1=Yohtaro|last2=Sogon|first2=Shunya|year=2008|title=Are Japanese More Collectivistic Than Americans?|journal=Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology|volume=39|issue=3|pages=237–250|doi=10.1177/0022022107313902|s2cid=145125365|issn=0022-0221}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Takano|first1=Yohtaro|last2=Osaka|first2=Eiko|year=2018|title=Comparing Japan and the United States on individualism/collectivism: A follow-up review|journal=Asian Journal of Social Psychology|volume=21|issue=4|pages=301–316|doi=10.1111/ajsp.12322|s2cid=149676839|issn=1367-2223|doi-access=free}}</ref> North America and Western Europe are the most individualistic in the world. Middle income regions such as Eastern Europe, South America and mainland East Asia have cultures which are neither very individualistic nor very collectivistic. The most collectivistic cultures in the world are from economically developing regions such as the Middle East and Northern Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, South and South-East Asia, Central Asia and Central America.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Minkov|first1=Michael|last2=Dutt|first2=Pinaki|last3=Schachner|first3=Michael|last4=Morales|first4=Oswaldo|last5=Sanchez|first5=Carlos|last6=Jandosova|first6=Janar|last7=Khassenbekov|first7=Yerlan|last8=Mudd|first8=Ben|year=2017|title=A revision of Hofstede's individualism-collectivism dimension|journal=Cross Cultural & Strategic Management|volume=24|issue=3|pages=29|doi=10.1108/ccsm-11-2016-0197|issn=2059-5794}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Welzel|first=Christian|title=Freedom Rising|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2013|isbn=978-1-139-54091-9|location=New York|pages=87|chapter=Chapter 2. Mapping Differences|doi=10.1017/cbo9781139540919}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Beugelsdijk|first1=Sjoerd|last2=Welzel|first2=Chris|date=2018|title=Dimensions and Dynamics of National Culture: Synthesizing Hofstede With Inglehart|journal=Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology|volume=49|issue=10|pages=1485|doi=10.1177/0022022118798505|pmid=30369633|pmc=6191680|issn=0022-0221|doi-access=free}}</ref> Against this background, a number of prominent authors from various disciplines (e.g., Louis Dumont, Geert Hofstede, Anthony Giddens, Zygmunt Bauman, Ronald Inglehart) have supported the influential thesis that the modernization of a society goes hand in hand with an increasing degree of individualization. However, this thesis has also found its critics, who point out, among other things, that the cultural-historical development of individualism from antiquity to the present has not proceeded in a straight line, that some societies with a more collectivist orientation are nevertheless highly modernized and that the concepts of individualism, collectivism and modernity lack conceptual clarity so that an appropriately differentiated analysis of the alleged connection is still lacking.<ref>Kagitcibasi, C. (2005). Modernization does not mean westernization: Emergence of a different pattern. In W. Friedlmeier, P. Chakkarath, and B. Schwarz (Eds.), ''Culture and human development (''pp. 255-272). Psychology Press.</ref><ref>Chakkarath, P. (2024). Is the individual an enlightened westerner? Some skeptical remarks on Eurocentric notions of self and the development of individualism. In A. Dueck & L. Sundararajan (Eds.), ''Values and indigenous psychology in the age of the machine and market: When the gods have fled'' (pp. 131-156). Springer International Publishing.</ref>   

An earlier analysis by [[Ruth Benedict]] in her book [[The Chrysanthemum and the Sword]] states that societies and groups can differ in the extent to which they are based upon predominantly "self-regarding" (individualistic, and/or self-interested) behaviors, rather than "other-regarding" (group-oriented, and group, or society-minded) behaviors. [[Ruth Benedict]] made a distinction, relevant in this context, between [[Guilt–shame–fear spectrum of cultures|guilt societies]] (e.g. [[medieval Europe]]) with an "internal reference standard" and [[shame societies]] (e.g. Japan, "bringing shame upon one's ancestors") with an "external reference standard", where people look to their peers for feedback on whether an action is acceptable or not.<ref>Benedict, Ruth; "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture." Rutland, VT and Tokyo, Japan: Charles E. Tuttle Co. 1954 orig. 1946.</ref>

Individualism is often contrasted either with [[totalitarianism]] or with [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivism]],<ref name="Hayek 1994 17, 37–48"/> but there is a spectrum of behaviors at the societal level ranging from highly individualistic societies through mixed societies to collectivist.<ref>{{Cite web|last=AFS-USA|date=2019-10-30|title=Individualism & Collectivism|url=https://www.afsusa.org/study-abroad/culture-trek/culture-points/culture-points-individualism-and-collectivism/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=AFS-USA|language=en-US|archive-date=2021-07-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709191136/https://www.afsusa.org/study-abroad/culture-trek/culture-points/culture-points-individualism-and-collectivism/|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|date=2012-02-20|title=Individualism vs. Collectivism: Our Future, Our Choice – The Objective Standard|language=en-US|work=The Objective Standard|url=https://theobjectivestandard.com/2012/02/individualism-collectivism/|access-date=2021-07-08}}</ref>

A 2022 study published by the [[Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization]] indicates that the individualistic societies have higher levels of [[charitable giving]], providing a response to critics of individualism and [[capitalism]]. The authors propose that individualism increases charity through direct mechanisms ([[self-interest|self-interested]] giving) and indirect mechanisms (reinforcing [[economic freedom]]).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cai |first1=Meina |last2=Caskey |first2=Gregory W. |last3=Cowen |first3=Nick |last4=Murtazashvili |first4=Ilia |last5=Murtazashvili |first5=Jennifer Brick |last6=Salahodjaev |first6=Raufhon |title=Individualism, economic freedom, and charitable giving |journal=[[Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization]] |date=2022 |volume=200 |pages=868–884 |doi=10.1016/j.jebo.2022.06.037 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The findings support [[Classical liberalism|classical liberal]] arguments that individualism has virtues, aligning with the views of thinkers like [[Adam Smith]] and [[David Hume]].

=== Competitive individualism ===
According to an [[Oxford English Dictionary|Oxford Dictionary]], "competitive individualism" in sociology is "the view that achievement and non-achievement should depend on merit. Effort and ability are regarded as prerequisites of success. Competition is seen as an acceptable means of distributing limited resources and rewards.

=== Methodological individualism ===
[[Methodological individualism]] is the view that phenomena can only be understood by examining how they result from the motivations and actions of individual agents.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/methodological-individualism/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Joseph|last=Heath|chapter=Methodological Individualism |editor-first=Edward N.|editor-last=Zalta|date=1 January 2015|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref> In economics, people's behavior is explained in terms of [[rational choice theory|rational choice]]s, as constrained by prices and incomes. The economist accepts individuals' preferences as givens. [[Gary Becker|Becker]] and [[George Stigler|Stigler]] provide a forceful statement of this view:
<blockquote>On the traditional view, an explanation of economic phenomena that reaches a difference in tastes between people or times is the terminus of the argument: the problem is abandoned at this point to whoever studies and explains tastes (psychologists? anthropologists? phrenologists? sociobiologists?). On our preferred interpretation, one never reaches this impasse: the economist continues to search for differences in prices or incomes to explain any differences or changes in behavior.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Stigler|first=George|author2=Gary Becker|date=Mar 1977|title=De gustibus non est disputandum|journal=American Economic Review|volume=67|issue=2|page=76|jstor=1807222}}</ref></blockquote>