/ART & ORGANISM
“FRENEMIES”
notes on interactions between competition and cooperation in ECOLOGY
In ethology, “frenemy” describes relationships combining cooperation and competition between the same individuals. The concept challenges binary views of social behavior by emphasizing familiarity, predictability, and conflict.
- The dear-enemy effect shows territorial neighbors remaining competitors while responding less aggressively to recognized neighbors than to unfamiliar intruders.
- Related patterns include competitive alliances, contingent cooperation, occasional cooperation among ecological competitors, and dominance relationships; baboons exemplify affiliation and competition within social networks.
- The central progression runs from stranger to threat to recognized rival to predictable neighbor, where antagonism becomes relational through communication and familiarity.
- The dear-enemy effect shows territorial neighbors remaining competitors while responding less aggressively to recognized neighbors than to unfamiliar intruders.
- Related patterns include competitive alliances, contingent cooperation, occasional cooperation among ecological competitors, and dominance relationships; baboons exemplify affiliation and competition within social networks.
- The central progression runs from stranger to threat to recognized rival to predictable neighbor, where antagonism becomes relational through communication and familiarity.
____________________________________
FRENEMY (adapted from summary prepared by AI in Microsoft 365 Copilot)
In ethology, “frenemy” describes relationships combining cooperation and competition between the same individuals. The concept challenges binary views of social behavior by emphasizing familiarity, predictability, and conflict.
- The dear-enemy effect shows territorial neighbors remaining competitors while responding less aggressively to recognized neighbors than to unfamiliar intruders.
- Related patterns include competitive alliances, contingent cooperation, occasional cooperation among ecological competitors, and dominance relationships; baboons exemplify affiliation and competition within social networks.
- The central progression runs from stranger to threat to recognized rival to predictable neighbor, where antagonism becomes relational through communication and familiarity.
In ethology, “frenemy” isn’t a standard technical term, but it is a surprisingly useful shorthand for relationships in which cooperation and competition coexist between the same individuals.
ART & ORGANISM speaks to the idea sometimes nicknamed “dear enemy” and referred to as neighbor recognition in A&O Communication notes [1]
A few phenomena sit close to what “frenemies” refers to:
- Dear-enemy effect. Territorial neighbors remain competitors, but once they recognize each other and territorial boundaries stabilize, they may respond less aggressively to one another than to unfamiliar intruders. In effect: I don’t like you, but I know you, and that’s useful.
- Competitive alliances. Social animals can cooperate with an individual in one context while competing with that same individual over food, dominance, or reproductive opportunities. Baboons are a good example of animals living within networks containing both affiliation and competition; female baboons form alliances and strong social bonds, especially among kin.
- Reciprocal or contingent cooperation. The relationship needn’t be intrinsically “friendly.” Cooperation can remain worthwhile only while the partner’s behavior makes it worthwhile.
- Interference competitors that sometimes cooperate. At the interspecific level, ecological competitors can occasionally benefit from coordinated behavior. The popular label “frenemy” can capture this, although facultative mutualism, mixed-species cooperation, or another more specific ecological term is usually preferable. (see https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/mutualism-examples-of-species-that-work-together.html )
- Dominance relationships. Two animals may affiliate, groom, play, or support one another while simultaneously maintaining an asymmetry involving priority of access to resources. So “friend” and “rival” aren’t necessarily alternative categories.
More deeply the idea of “frenemy” undermines our tendency to put social relations into binary boxes:
cooperation ↔ competition
affiliation ↔ aggression
friend ↔ enemy
An animal relationship can occupy both sides simultaneously. Indeed, ethologically, repeated competition can create information, predictability, and therefore a peculiar kind of social stability. Your “dear enemy” example captures that beautifully: communication permits two antagonists to become known antagonists.
There is an intriguing conceptual progression here:
stranger → threat → recognized rival → predictable neighbor
At the last stage, antagonism itself has acquired a relationship.
That may be the biologically interesting core of the human idea of a frenemy: not “half friend, half enemy,” but an individual whose value partly arises because cooperation, familiarity, and conflict have become entangled.
[1] As Huxley pointed out (in Doors of Perception above) there are levels of organization in sociality– echoed by a Pashtun saying[ii] (cited by Isabel Hilton New Yorker Dec 03 2001 p59): “Me against my brother, my brother and me against our cousins, we and our cousins against the enemy.” [Now see Lao-Tze on levels of sociality] (FROM https://neilgreenberg.com/ao-individuation-and-socialization/ )