A way to divide people

Posted by – January 30, 2018

Some are interested in whether or not stereotypes and prejudices are accurate, others are not. The former people see the division as “scientific / rational vs. emotional / political”, the latter see the division as “pro-prejudice vs. anti-prejudice”.

1 Comment on A way to divide people

Respond | Trackback

  1. sam says:

    FB comments:

    Pekka Tolvanen: Not sure if the “truly” prejudiced people who aren’t interested in accuracy would see the division as anti- vs. pro-prejudice.

    Sam Hardwick: Why not? Wouldn’t they think, “Those anti-prejudicers hate us because of our prejudices, but there’s nothing wrong with our prejudices!”

    Pekka Tolvanen :Depends on what you mean by interest in accuracy I guess. Both non-interested groups might be very small groups of very weird people, or big groups of people who ignore evidence selectively and don’t see themselves as irrational or prejudiced.

    Sam Hardwick: True. I think of both groups as being quite large. The non-interested prejudiced group is “openly clannish”, which is not unusual, and many in the non-interested non-prejudiced group believe that whether or not stereotypes are accurate, believing in stereotypes perpetuates them so it is virtuous to disbelieve in stereotypes regardless of how accurate they are.

    Sam Hardwick: (Also many people legitimately believe that stereotypes and prejudices are completely false, and are not interested in arguments about their accuracy because they view such arguments as an attack. I once got into an argument about whether gay men are more likely to have HIV, and simply couldn’t get past the other person’s anti-homophobia barriers.)