Why are we prejudice

[Golfingnut]

It would appear that it is nit our fault that as we age we are quite prejudice about many issues.

Older People Are More Prejudiced - And They Can't Help It (http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20000326045826data_trunc_sys.shtml)

[rubicon]

These experts would have save themselves and others time and money because the answer to their question was explained in the musical South Pacific "You have to be carefully taught".

Actually prejudice was probably instinctive and essential in early man because it made them cautious and defensive when being approached by strangers.

Today I suspect there is a misunderstanding between being prejudice and not attracted to certain type personalities (simple likes and dislikes or customs and traditions) ; irrespective of race creed religion.

As for older folks because they are retired from employment and the social scene they probably freely display more because they are no longer obligated
or dependent on anyone. So the consequences of calling someone a ------) you fill in the blanks is no longer relevant

[2BNTV]

As the Beatles said, "LET IT BE". :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[graciegirl]

As the Beatles said, "LET IT BE". :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

You are right Joe.

There will be bitterness and ugliness in this thread.


And it was not started in order to educate and to bring peace.

[joerocker]

Wisdom, prejudice, go hand in hand. As you age, it's harder to pull the wool over our eyes and we see truth for truth no matter what we're supposed to think about things.

[BarryRX]

Wisdom, prejudice, go hand in hand. As you age, it's harder to pull the wool over our eyes and we see truth for truth no matter what we're supposed to think about things.

Please explain. It sounds like you're saying that the more wisdom a person has, the more prejudice he has. I have found just the opposite to be true.

[redwitch]

Sorry, I cannot accept an excuse for people to be small-minded, bigoted or downright mean. We have choices and we do what we want with those choices. It is easy to say that inhibitions break down as we age but that doesn't mean we have to open our big mouths and show others our cruelty, ignorance and insecurities.

[Shimpy]

Sorry, I cannot accept an excuse for people to be small-minded, bigoted or downright mean. We have choices and we do what we want with those choices. It is easy to say that inhibitions break down as we age but that doesn't mean we have to open our big mouths and show others our cruelty, ignorance and insecurities.


EVERYONE is prejudice.....What if I said I hate serial killers, rapists, child and animal abusers. By your standards I show ignorance and insecurities????

[kittygilchrist]

Well there you go again Gnut, stirring up debate. Interesting stuff. thanks.

[gomoho]

EVERYONE is prejudice.....What if I said I hate serial killers, rapists, child and animal abusers. By your standards I show ignorance and insecurities????

Shimpy - excellent point - I guess some prejudice is politically correct! Who decides?

[billethkid]

I think the older one is, the more likely they are to speak their mind, right, wrong or indifferent.

And then there are those who measure such things.

The younger one is the more likely they are to modify what they think or feel so as to not hurt one's feelings or cast doubt or be not in the popular majority.

Political correctness (barf...happens every time I use the term) is nothing more than an excuse to not do or say what is really right or wrong......the cowards way!

[gomoho]

[QUOTE=billethkid;842581]I think the older one is, the more likely they are to speak their mind, right, wrong or indifferent.

The younger one is the more likely they are to modify what they think or feel so as to not hurt one's feelings or cast doubt or be not in the popular majority.

Maybe the younger folks are not as confident in their beliefs - don't think they worry too much about hurting anyone's feeling, but do believe there is something to wanting to be aligned with the popular majority.

[BarryRX]

EVERYONE is prejudice.....What if I said I hate serial killers, rapists, child and animal abusers. By your standards I show ignorance and insecurities????

The word prejudice refers to prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. I don't think it applies to those you listed as an example. In those cases, we are well aware of the facts. Hating a child abuser isn't prejudice, it's a perfectly normal disgust at an abhorrent act.

[redwitch]

EVERYONE is prejudice.....What if I said I hate serial killers, rapists, child and animal abusers. By your standards I show ignorance and insecurities????

Meriam-Webster: "prej·u·dice noun \ˈpre-jə-dəs\
: an unfair feeling of dislike for a person or group because of race, sex, religion, etc.

: a feeling of like or dislike for someone or something especially when it is not reasonable or logical" (emphasis added)

"big·ot noun \ˈbi-gət\
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)" (emphasis added)

Disliking or even hating someone because they have harmed others willfully (serial killers, rapists, abusers, etc.) is an informed decision. Yes, we're all prejudiced but that doesn't mean we have the right to open our mouths and spew venom at someone because they have different viewpoints or don't look the way we think we should. Barring those with Alzheimer's or other mental illness, old age should not be used as an excuse to spew this venom.

I'll be the first to admit that I'm a total bigot when it comes to those who are prejudiced. You use racial or sexual slurs around me, I will speak out. You harm another because of their race, religion, sexual preference, I will act out. Bigots are not welcome to enter into my life in any way, shape or form. They and their ill-founded hatred are free to take a very long walk off a very short pier (hopefully into shark-infested waters).

The difference is that my prejudice is not uninformed. I have seen the harm bigotry does, both psychologically and physically. I have heard venom spewed for no other reason than a person was transgender. I have seen judgments made based on the color of a man's skin, not on his behavior. I can cite studies showing the misconceptions of racial/religious/sexual bigotry and the harm caused by these misconceptions. If you can show me the harm of being adamantly against serial killers, rapists, abusers and, yes, bigots, I'll even listen and, who knows, maybe get over some of my dislike of those types of people.

[joerocker]

Red, do you see the irony?

You do yourself what you hate others for doing. Judging. Unfairly.

People have a right to their own opinion just as you do. Respect that and accept it. Not everyone will share your views.

[billethkid]

People have a right to their own opinion just as you do. Respect that and accept it. Not everyone will share your views.

BINGO!!!!! All violators take heed!

[redwitch]

Red, do you see the irony?

You do yourself what you hate others for doing. Judging. Unfairly.

People have a right to their own opinion just as you do. Respect that and accept it. Not everyone will share your views.

No, I really don't see any irony. I am NOT judging unfairly. I've seen what bigotry can do to others. It is as ugly as rape. It is as cruel and heartless as a serial killer. I will always respect a bigot's right to feel as they do but that doesn't mean I have to like it nor do I have to tolerate hearing it. A bigot will never be welcome in my home nor at any table at which I sit.

I don't look at someone and automatically assume that s/he is a bigot (unless they happen to be wearing a KKK sheet with insignia or the dressed like a Brown Shirt or in full SS uniform) any more than I would assume the woman wearing the Democrat t-shirt is a good person. That would be judging unfairly. I judge each person on their merits -- their words, their deeds -- not their appearance, their status, their wealth.

If you use racially bigoted words, it is reasonable to assume you are a bigot. If you say stereotypical things about another because of the way they dress, the color of their skin, their choice of a god, then I'm going to assume that at the very least you are prejudiced. If you physically try to act on your words, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop you from doing so.

So, where am I judging unfairly? Where am I denying a bigot the right to think and feel whatever it feels? I'll just be damned if they'll use those kind of words around me and I certainly don't have to associate with them.

[ilovetv]

Don't ya just love it when "open-minded" and "accepting" people campaigning and researching against prejudicial labeling and conclusions STEREOTYPE millions of people based on a flimsy 14-yr-old study with only 71 people in it???

[njbchbum]

Can anyone be prejudiced and/or bigoted if they never verbalize an opinion/a statement one way or the other?

[2BNTV]

OK, Lou, I'll bite.

We are all prejuiced to some extent, if we are riased in a famuily that had stong predjedices. It seems to rub off as we had heard it, so many times.

When we turn 18, we all have a rsponsibility to ourselves, to think for ourselves, and reject thoughts, that are not right. Are we perfect?

NO!!!

We owe it to ourselve,s to become an open fair minded person, who rejects discrimination and biases, that are held by our parents, and do what is right.

In a perect world, there would be no predejuice and hateful things, that are done to other people. It cannot be chalked up to, "man's inhumanity to man".

Nuff said..........

[Golfingnut]

You are right Joe.

There will be bitterness and ugliness in this thread.


And it was not started in order to educate and to bring peace.

I read every post and see calm honest opinions and discussions. No bitterness and ugliness here. I try to wait and not prejudge others.

[joerocker]

Can anyone be prejudiced and/or bigoted if they never verbalize an opinion/a statement one way or the other?

Yes, they're just afraid to speak their minds because it's politically incorrect and they get "beat up" when they say something.

OK, Lou, I'll bite.

We are all prejuiced to some extent, if we are riased in a famuily that had stong predjedices. It seems to rub off as we had heard it, so many times.

When we turn 18, we all have a rsponsibility to ourselves, to think for ourselves, and reject thoughts, that are not right. Are we perfect?

NO!!!

We owe it to ourselve,s to become an open fair minded person, who rejects discrimination and biases, that are held by our parents, and do what is right.

In a perect world, there would be no predejuice and hateful things, that are done to other people. It cannot be chalked up to, "man's inhumanity to man".

Nuff said..........

My case was opposite. There was no prejudice or bigotry in my family. We were free to find our own truths. And that's exactly what happened. Through life experiences I've found my "truths". Most are not what I've been told all my life.

Stereotypes are for the most part accurate, it's how they become stereotypes. If they weren't, they'd die out and be forgotten. These things live on because they ARE accurate.

Yes, we DO owe it to ourselves to become open minded and search for the truth. Things continue to get worse when a problem isn't addressed. We have problems that aren't getting addressed because we're not allowed to discuss them.

We don't live in a perfect world, deal with it accordingly. People are just another animal inhabiting this planet. We're not as superior as we think we are. Most people are basically "out for themselves". You can't legislate that innate behavior away.

[graciegirl]

I think I recognize you Joe. And you speak a lot of truths. But...if you are who I think you are, you went too far for me.


And if you are a new poster, I apologize.

[BarryRX]

Stereotype: To unfairly believe that all people or things with a particular characteristic are the same.

Joe.....you couldn't be more wrong.

[PennBF]

A good book on this subject is "The Believing Brain from Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies". by Michael Shermer. Not to take away from the Author but an underlying theory is that first the Brain decides what it wants to believe and they goes about the process of developing proof of the belief. That is opposed to first developing proof and then deciding a belief. I think an example of this is that as children we are taught a religion and as we grow we develop support and reasons for our religion. In other words we are first given a belief and then go about proving it is the right belief. Interesting theory? :bowdown:

[gomoho]

I would actually take that theory from the book you mention one step further that our brain proceeds to go about either proving or refuting that belief. Otherwise we would grow up accepting and believing everything we are told as children and we don't do that - we question things and come to our own truths.

[PennBF]

This is one of those challenging theories. As we grow up and disregard our teaching as children we develop beliefs. Are these beliefs because of full discovery of proofs or at some point do we decide what we believe and then go about prooving it. At every point of our thoughts we decide on a belief and then go about "proving" it. It may come from our parents, our teachers, professors, or just a friend? Is there such a case where the person does extensive research and based on that decides on a position. Probably. but it may be that each point of being convinced the individual is creating proof based on a belief. One illustration is the person who submits they have the "truth" of something. I think the very best illustration of all of this is go to 10 different person(s) who profess their religion is the "truth"...??? I am a religious person but keep a positive eye as to how and why I got there?:bowdown:

[joerocker]

Stereotype: To unfairly believe that all people or things with a particular characteristic are the same.

Joe.....you couldn't be more wrong.

Ok...then "typing" is what we do and should do. We see similarities between groups and through experience can predict similar behavior from other members of the same group. Just drop the "stereo", the "unfair" part. Drawing conclusions as to others future actions is a crucial part of maturation and development. Otherwise you keep falling for the same "tricks" over and over. I don't know why "typing" is officially frowned upon. Thieves steal over and over. Pedophiles molest over and over. Other groups have habitual "weaknesses" over and over. Only their actions are deemed "acceptable" and "typing" them verboten.

A good book on this subject is "The Believing Brain from Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies". by Michael Shermer. Not to take away from the Author but an underlying theory is that first the Brain decides what it wants to believe and they goes about the process of developing proof of the belief. That is opposed to first developing proof and then deciding a belief. I think an example of this is that as children we are taught a religion and as we grow we develop support and reasons for our religion. In other words we are first given a belief and then go about proving it is the right belief. Interesting theory? :bowdown:

I would actually take that theory from the book you mention one step further that our brain proceeds to go about either proving or refuting that belief. Otherwise we would grow up accepting and believing everything we are told as children and we don't do that - we question things and come to our own truths.

Michael Shermer also does a newsletter called "sceptic".

Confirmation bias. When you only listen to and accept that which agrees with your current view. If you like something, you only recognize that which is positive towards it. If you don't, you only recognize that which is negative towards it. It's a very common thought process. Everyone does it naturally. You have to go out of your way, feel like you're wasting your time, to listen to the other side. It's a very strong natural tendency.

We are conditioned from infancy to believe this and that. For most, it's only when shown by "authority" that belief is suspended. Many lies DO extend well into adulthood. Those lies are the things "we're not supposed to discuss". Because they (people depending on us believing) don't want us to REALLY examine the issues. It's why we don't discuss religion or politics.

Many continue to carry many childhood beliefs forever.

This is one of those challenging theories. As we grow up and disregard our teaching as children we develop beliefs. Are these beliefs because of full discovery of proofs or at some point do we decide what we believe and then go about prooving it. At every point of our thoughts we decide on a belief and then go about "proving" it. It may come from our parents, our teachers, professors, or just a friend? Is there such a case where the person does extensive research and based on that decides on a position. Probably. but it may be that each point of being convinced the individual is creating proof based on a belief. One illustration is the person who submits they have the "truth" of something. I think the very best illustration of all of this is go to 10 different person(s) who profess their religion is the "truth"...??? I am a religious person but keep a positive eye as to how and why I got there?:bowdown:

IMO, most people believe what they're told. Be it reading, lecture, conversation, whatever. If someone "credible" says it, it's true. I think very few actually "test" what they're told. I'm one of them. Everyone who knows me knows "I'll look it up, I'll check it out". My "big" beliefs all came through my own research. That is why my views on the big things (religion, politics, individual rights, etc.), are not what most people believe. There's a lot of misinformation out there. Misdirection is a better word.

The only "truth" I know is we don't know the truth. Knowing that you can go to 10 different people and get 10 different "truths" about religion, why are you still religious? There are many completely different religions in the world. Within those major religions, there are thousands of different sects. Each professing that they know the truth. My bet, and what I believe is, none of them know "the truth".

Nice discussion...

[BarryRX]

Ok...then "typing" is what we do and should do. We see similarities between groups and through experience can predict similar behavior from other members of the same group. Just drop the "stereo", the "unfair" part. Drawing conclusions as to others future actions is a crucial part of maturation and development. Otherwise you keep falling for the same "tricks" over and over. I don't know why "typing" is officially frowned upon. Thieves steal over and over. Pedophiles molest over and over. Other groups have habitual "weaknesses" over and over. Only their actions are deemed "acceptable" and "typing" them verboten.





Michael Shermer also does a newsletter called "sceptic".

Confirmation bias. When you only listen to and accept that which agrees with your current view. If you like something, you only recognize that which is positive towards it. If you don't, you only recognize that which is negative towards it. It's a very common thought process. Everyone does it naturally. You have to go out of your way, feel like you're wasting your time, to listen to the other side. It's a very strong natural tendency.

We are conditioned from infancy to believe this and that. For most, it's only when shown by "authority" that belief is suspended. Many lies DO extend well into adulthood. Those lies are the things "we're not supposed to discuss". Because they (people depending on us believing) don't want us to REALLY examine the issues. It's why we don't discuss religion or politics.

Many continue to carry many childhood beliefs forever.



IMO, most people believe what they're told. Be it reading, lecture, conversation, whatever. If someone "credible" says it, it's true. I think very few actually "test" what they're told. I'm one of them. Everyone who knows me knows "I'll look it up, I'll check it out". My "big" beliefs all came through my own research. That is why my views on the big things (religion, politics, individual rights, etc.), are not what most people believe. There's a lot of misinformation out there. Misdirection is a better word.

The only "truth" I know is we don't know the truth. Knowing that you can go to 10 different people and get 10 different "truths" about religion, why are you still religious? There are many completely different religions in the world. Within those major religions, there are thousands of different sects. Each professing that they know the truth. My bet, and what I believe is, none of them know "the truth".

Nice discussion...

There is a flaw in your logic. Of course thieves steal and pedophiles molest. But we are talking about stereotypes and prejudice. If you says thieves steal, well that's pretty obvious. But if you were to say that Italian Americans steal because they are members of the mafia, then that is stereotyping and prejudice. No doubt there are some Italian Americans who belong to the mafia, but most do not. (please forgive me Italian Americans, I am just using a foolish stereotype to illustrate a point.) You said that "other groups" have habitual weaknesses. Why don't you let us know what you perceive those group weaknesses to be. I think that if you list them it will more likely point out your personal prejudices than actual facts. I am both Jewish and of Polish heritage (and very proud of both), so I would be particularly interested in hearing the weaknesses of my groups.

[skyguy79]

Quotes made to link post being replied to!
Ditto!
How do I get that danged "Like" button to work?

Like Comment Share

[onslowe]

A few quick comments. Golfingnut, this thread is going to get bitter and unfriendly. I am a bit disappointed given the fact that I tried to helpfully contribute and participate with others in at least one of your earlier threads. I hope you do consider the advice and counsel others gave you and you are not just moving on to other 'touchy' topics. These are meant as friendly comments.

To Joerocker, and to PennBF, please also read and consider "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist," by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek. Among other things, it quite handily deals with Truth, and which religion might stand the test of honest reasoning from evidence and which might not. But more to the point in this thread, it displays for all to see the absolute illogic and arrogant prejudice of the New Atheists and their sheep like followers. When you mention Michael Schermer, and one of his books, please let readers know he is virulently anti-religion. Puts things in perspective for inquiring minds.

Pax.

[joerocker]

A few quick comments. Golfingnut, this thread is going to get bitter and unfriendly. I am a bit disappointed given the fact that I tried to helpfully contribute and participate with others in at least one of your earlier threads. I hope you do consider the advice and counsel others gave you and you are not just moving on to other 'touchy' topics. These are meant as friendly comments.

To Joerocker, and to PennBF, please also read and consider "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist," by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek. Among other things, it quite handily deals with Truth, and which religion might stand the test of honest reasoning from evidence and which might not. But more to the point in this thread, it displays for all to see the absolute illogic and arrogant prejudice of the New Atheists and their sheep like followers. When you mention Michael Schermer, and one of his books, please let readers know he is virulently anti-religion. Puts things in perspective for inquiring minds.

Pax.

Oh, I hope it doesn't get ugly...

So? People siding for religion cite people virulently FOR religion. Lets give both sides an equal say.

[Vernster]

Red, do you see the irony?

You do yourself what you hate others for doing. Judging. Unfairly.

People have a right to their own opinion just as you do. Respect that and accept it. Not everyone will share your views.

How do you figure that Red witch is judging unfairly ? Why do you feel that we should respect the values and opinions of a bigot or someone that discriminates against others ?

[PennBF]

It is great to have a real good discussion on a subject in TOTV's with few "attempts to be funny or nasty". Joerocker I pretty much agree with your note. In another case one would suggest that to read a book by Schermer may indicate the person is "anti religion" let me assure I am not. When I was in College I was an assistant pastor at a church to help pay my way through school. Of course I am no longer near being a Pastor but I do believe in religion and although I am not sure mine is the absolute "truth" it is good enough to have me have some basis for good living. Again thanks for the intelligent and meaningful dialoge. :bowdown:

[2BNTV]

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

"I never beieved in looking up to too many people, as they will have a way of disappointing you". "Ordinary People" quote from Donald Sutherland.

There are several people, (can count them on one hand), who I have greatly respected, who have shared their truths. They are people who I would listen to intently, as they have a great amount of knowledge.

Unfortunately, they are no longer with us.

[PennBF]

There seems to be a confusion in 2BNTV's note. Because someone reads a book does not mean the person "looks up" to the Author. If that were the case I would have to look up to a multiude of people. It does mean the person may have taken something from the book. Possibily all, portions or none. I would hope that is the case. I do believe in some of what Schermer has written and think others are not accurate "in my mind". It is thought provoking and it is always left to the reader to decide for themselves what they like and don't like. The only thing I will add is that I kind of write off persons who profess to have the "truth" as truth is pretty fickle. :mornincoffee: