Yea, I definitely understand what you are saying. I dont get those people either. Its frustrating and even heartbreaking because they are so misled–but are also so easily “misleadable”. Its hard to not fault them for it; its hard not to call them dumb.
I guess historically we called those people “suckers” or “rubes” – which still may not accurately reflect that they can be very smart people (or even critical thinkers) in most other aspects.
My question to them was: How does “dehumanizing” work to begin with? If we’re wired to be social empathetic creatures, what is so powerful about these statements to unwire us?
The entire story is missing right between these two paragraphs.
Why are dehumanization and violence so closely connected? As social creatures, we’re wired to empathize with our fellow human beings, and we get uncomfortable when we see someone suffering.
Once someone is dehumanized, we usually deny them the consideration, compassion and empathy that we typically give other people. It can relax our instinctive aversion to aggression and violence.
Yea, I definitely understand what you are saying. I dont get those people either. Its frustrating and even heartbreaking because they are so misled–but are also so easily “misleadable”. Its hard to not fault them for it; its hard not to call them dumb.
I guess historically we called those people “suckers” or “rubes” – which still may not accurately reflect that they can be very smart people (or even critical thinkers) in most other aspects.
In related news, TheConversation promoted this 2018 article on Bluesky yesterday https://theconversation.com/the-slippery-slope-of-dehumanizing-language-97512
My question to them was: How does “dehumanizing” work to begin with? If we’re wired to be social empathetic creatures, what is so powerful about these statements to unwire us?
The entire story is missing right between these two paragraphs.