4 ms·

Here's a question that I've been wondering about for a while: What happens if your fundamental attributions grow up from proximate personal narratives into a s

Here's a question that I've been wondering about for a while: What happens if your fundamental attributions grow up from proximate personal narratives into a social philosophy? Perhaps one where you understand yourself as some worthy ingroup whose shortcomings are primarily functions of imposed circumstance, with the shortcomings of outsiders primarily being functions of their character failings? (Yes, you can see that in your political opposition! Congratulations. I won't say it's equally distributed across political spectra, since I think it's plausible that there are camps which are more widely concerned about circumstance over individual character and addressing systematic issues that contribute to circumstance. But if you can't see some form of this in the political affiliations you identify with, then you may not have truly grasped the fundamental attribution error dynamic yet.)

dragonwriter 5y ago
> What happens if your fundamental attributions grow up from proximate personal narratives into a social philosophy? > Perhaps one where you understand yourself as some worthy ingroup whose shortcomings are primarily functions of imposed circumstance, with the shortcomings of outsiders primarily being functions of their character failings? If other people in the ingroup you identify share this identity, then, congratulations, you are now part of a human tribe.
- MikeUt 5y ago
  That's a bit reductive. All tribes may share this characteristic, but not to the same degree. The GP even says as much.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
raxxorrax 5y ago
I don't think anything would happen, it would maybe just be added to the list of common misconceptions. It could cause conflicts with those that don't use the same axioms.