The Rule of One Hundred and Fifty

From “The Tipping Point”:

Humans socialize in the largest groups of all primates because we are the only animals with brains large enough to handle the complexities of that social arrangement. [Robin] Dunbar has actually developed an equation, which works for most primates, in which he plugs in what he calls the neocortex ratio of a particular species — the size of the neocortex relative to the size of the brain — and the equation spits out the expected maximum group size of the animal. If you plug in the neocortex ratio for Homo sapiens, you get a group estimate of 147.8 — or roughly 150. “The figure of 150 seems to represent the maximum number of individual with whom we can have a genuinely social relationship, the kind of relationship that goes with knowing who they are and how they relate to us. Putting it another way, it’s the number of people you would not feel embarrassed about joining uninvited for a drink if you happened to bump into them in a bar.”

The Power of Context (Part Two) (page 179)

In reality, that would be far too many for me, however it does back up an interesting echo from the Bible: the 144,000 (12 x 12 x 1000) Elect.

[Robin] Dunbar has combed through the anthropological literature and found that the number 150 pops up again and again. For example, he looks at 21 different hunter-gatherer societies for which we have solid historical evidence, from the Walbiri of Australia to the Tauade of New Guinea to the Ammassalik of Greenland to the Ona of Tierra del Guego and found that the average number of people in their villages was 148.4.

Ibid (pages 179-180)

So, not 150, after all: 148.

The number 148 represents the weights on the scales. They can lean to either side: for example, towards development or decline.

Angel Numbers

In other words, the Tipping Point.

Wow.