4 ms·

The problem with Us vs. Them thinking isn't that there is a group of people that you fundamentally disagree with, but rather that you've constructed a somewhat

The problem with Us vs. Them thinking isn't that there is a group of people that you fundamentally disagree with, but rather that you've constructed a somewhat nebulous "them" which you've ascribed all negative qualities about "them". The way to recognise this is to ask yourself if you can actually name any particular example of the "them" you're arguing against. Because if not, you risk arguing against a straw man you yourself created. We're at the point where whole communities are being erected to argue against a "them", usually with an opposing community arguing against a similarly distorted image of the "us".

adrianmonk 9y ago
Perhaps along the same lines, elimination of us vs. them thinking shouldn't be predicated on elimination of all differences. Mainly because it's totally unrealistic to think that will ever happen. Instead, we should be able to move beyond the us vs. them approach to the world without first making sure that the "them" are exactly like"us".
lucideer 9y ago
> The way to recognise this is to ask yourself if you can actually name any particular example of the "them" you're arguing against. Unfortunately, I think what can often compound this line of thinking is a willingness to speculatively ascribe qualities to people we've just met in an attempt to put them into a box we can relate to (either positively relate or negatively relate). Asking someone to think of a particular example of "them" might simply lead to an example of someone they've judged on first impressions.
- contravariant 9y ago
  That's a fair point. I guess the real problem is that any claims about "them" can't really be refuted by anyone. So a better method would be to ask yourself if there's someone who could reject your claims. If not your statements are not falsifiable, which makes debating them somewhat pointless.

adrianmonk 9y ago

Perhaps along the same lines, elimination of us vs. them thinking shouldn't be predicated on elimination of all differences. Mainly because it's totally unrealistic to think that will ever happen. Instead, we should be able to move beyond the us vs. them approach to the world without first making sure that the "them" are exactly like"us".

lucideer 9y ago

> The way to recognise this is to ask yourself if you can actually name any particular example of the "them" you're arguing against. Unfortunately, I think what can often compound this line of thinking is a willingness to speculatively ascribe qualities to people we've just met in an attempt to put them into a box we can relate to (either positively relate or negatively relate). Asking someone to think of a particular example of "them" might simply lead to an example of someone they've judged on first impressions.

contravariant 9y ago
That's a fair point. I guess the real problem is that any claims about "them" can't really be refuted by anyone. So a better method would be to ask yourself if there's someone who could reject your claims. If not your statements are not falsifiable, which makes debating them somewhat pointless.