Argues that belonging shapes survival strategies in human societies, implying its essential role in adaptation.
Why did Homo sapiens survive while other human species disappeared? This paper argues that the answer lies not primarily in superior physical strength or intelligence, but in humanity’s unparalleled capacity to construct institutions of belonging. The article develops an ontology of belonging grounded in three interconnected strata of reality: the material, the biological, and the human. While biological organisms adapt primarily through evolution, human societies adapt through institutions understood as technologies of belonging that make cooperation possible in a non-ergodic and uncertain world. Human history is interpreted as a succession of attempts to construct larger and more stable communities of belonging, from family and tribe to city, nation, and increasingly global institutions. However, this process is neither linear nor irreversible. Belonging is always imperfect and remains continuously exposed to fragmentation, exclusion, and institutional decline. The paper further argues that ontological assumptions shape institutional imagination and therefore influence the future trajectory of civilization. An ontology of belonging offers an alternative to ontologies centered exclusively on individualism or balances of power and may contribute to the institutional innovations required for humanity to successfully navigate the challenges of the twenty-first century.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carlos Federico Obregon Diaz (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: