Categories or Stereotypes?

"Prejudices, emerge from the disposition of the human mind, to perceive and process information in categories," said the Moon when she started to appear. "'Categories' is a nicer, more neutral word than 'stereotypes,' but it's the same thing," she added, then went on, "Cognitive psychologists, consider stereotypes to be energy-saving devices that allow us to make effcient decisions on the basis of past experience; help us quickly process new information and retrieve memories; make sense of real differences between groups; and predict, ofen with considerable accuracy, how others will behave or how they think. We wisely rely on stereotypes and the quick information they give us to avoid danger, approach possible new friends, choose one school or job over another, or decide that that person across this crowded room, will be the love of our lives.

That's the upside. The downside is, that stereotypes flatten out differences within the category we are looking at, and exagerate differences between categories.

All of us, recognize variation within our own party, ethnicity, or nation, bur we are inclined to generalize from a few encounters with people of other categories and lump them al together as 'Them.' Sometimes, we tend to divide the world, as everyone does, into 'us' and 'them.' 'Us,' is the most fundamemal social category in the brain's organizing system, and it's hardwired. Even the collective pronouns, 'us' and 'them' are powerful emotional signals.

A soon as people have created a category called 'us,' however, they invariably perceive everybody else as 'not-us.' Obviously, certain categories of 'us,' are more crucial to our identities than the kind of car we drive, or the number of dot we can guess on a slide—sexuality, religion, politics, ethnicity, and nationality, for starters. Without feeling attached to groups that give our lives meaning, identity, and purpose, we would suffer the intolerable sensation that we were loose marbles floating in a random universe. Therefore, we will do what it takes to preserve these attachments.

Evolutionary psychologists argue that ethnocentrism—the belief that our own culture, nation, or religion is superior to all others—aids survival by strengthening our bonds to our primary social groups and thus, increasing our willingness to work, fight, and occasionally, die for them. When things are going well, people feel pretty tolerant of other cultures and religions, but when they are angry, anxious, or threatened, the default position is, to activate their blind spots. We have the human qualities of intelligence and deep emotions, but we consider that 'They,' are dumb, the are crybabie, they don't know the meaning of love, shame, grief, or remorse.

The very act of thinking that 'They' are not as smart or reasonable as 'Us,' makes us feel closer to others who are like us. But, just as crucially, it allows us to justify how we treat them. We invoke stereotypes to justify behavior that would otherwise, make us feel bad about the kind of person we are, or the kind of country we live in.

Prejudice justifes the ill treatment we want to inflict on others, and we want to inflict ill treatment on others, becuse we don't like them. And why don't we like them? Because they are competing with us for jobs in a scarce job marker. Because we want to presere our positions of status, power, and privilege. Because we need to feel we are better than somebody. Because our country is waging war against them. Because they refuse to assimilate into our culture.

By understanding prejudice as our self-justifying servant, we can better see, why some prejudices are s hard to eradicate: They allow people to justify and defend their most important social identities—their race, their religion, their sexuality—while reducing the dissonance between 'I am a good person' and 'I really don't like those people.' Fortunately, we can better understand the conditions, under which prejudices diminish: when the economic competition subsides, when the truce is signed, when the profession is integrated, when they become more familiar and comfortable, when we are in a position to realize that they aren't so different from us."

"And so," the Moon paused, then connected, "Last night, I saw a certain Widower, in order to amuse his solitary hours, and in some measure supply the conversation of his departed helpmate of loquacious memory, determined to purchase a Parrot.

He knew where to go, and knew an honest dealer. And with his view, he applied to a dealer in birds, as He asked the dealer, 'O brother, show me the parrot that can catch my heart!" 'Certainly!' said the dealer and showed him a large collection of Parrots, of various kinds.

Whilst they were exercising their talkative talents before him, one repeating the cries of the town, another asking for a cup of sack, and a third bawling for a coach, he observed a green Parrot perched in a thoughtful manner at a distance upon the foot of a table.

'And so you, my grave gentleman,' said he, 'are quite silent.' To which the Parrot replied, like a philosophical bird, 'I want to be something.'

'I have decided! I'll take this one!' said our wIdower firmly. 'But... but that's...!' the dealer was rather hesitated. 'No buts, you know, when I said I like it, I like it, even a truckload of money, I'll pay for it!' said our Widower. 'No, I didn't mean like that my brother! How can I explain it huh?' the dealer was more hesitant. 'Never mind, don't be hesitate to offer the price! ... Or this ...' as he put quite a lot of money on the table, then said, 'Now please prepare the parrot, I'll take it home!'

Pleased with the sensible answer, our Widower immediately paid down the price, and took home the bird, conceiving great things from a creature who had given so striking a specimen of his parts.

But after having instructed the Parrot during a whole month, he found to his great disappointment that, he could get nothing more from him than the fatiguing repetition of the sentence, 'I want to be something.'

'I find,' said he, in great wrath, 'That thou art an invincible fool; and ten times more a fool was I, for having formed a favourable opinion of thy abilities upon no better foundation than an affected solemnity.'"

The next day, our Widower, returned the bird to the Dealer, who said, 'Pardon my brother, if you had listened to me, you would have gotten one of the best, but it was sold out. And this bird, only knows one sentence, and even then, my son taught it.'

'Sorry bro, my mistake!' our Widower demand an apology. 'It's OK! Good for you, cause there are people, do not want to admit their mistakes. So, come, I'll show you more interesting birds!'

The moon withdrew and said, "As fallible human beings, all of us share the impulse to justify ourselves and avoid taking responsibility for any actions that turn out to be harmful, immoral, or stupid. Most of us, will never be in a position to make decisions affecting the lives and deaths of millions of people, but whether the consequences of our mistakes are trivial or tragic, on a small scale or a national canvas, most of us find it difcult, if not impossible, to say, 'I was wrong; I made a terrible mistake.' The higher the stakes—emotional, financial, moral—the greater the difficulty.

It goes further man that: Most people, when directly confronted by evidence that they are wrong, do not change their point of view or course of action, but justify it, even more tenaciosly. Even irrefutable evidence is rarely enough to pierce the mental armor of self-justifcation. 

Lao Tzu said,

Agreat nation is like a great man.

When he makes a mistake, he realizes it.

Having realized it, he admits it.

Having admitted it, he corrects it.

He considers those who point out his faults,

as his most benevolent teachers.

"And Allah knows best."

Citations & References:
- Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson, Mistakes Were Made (but not by me), Harcourt
- J.B. Rundell, Aesop's Fables, Cassell, Petter and Galpin

Bahasa