There is one substantial difference between the self and the group. The self always exists as itself, while the group is ever changing; to the degree that at different times, the same group can consist of entirely different individuals.
Every time someone says or writes "we", or any derivative of it, a red light illuminates in my mind. It goes something like this:
- "Who are the individuals referred to, exactly?"
- "What are the definite and consistent properties of the group?"
- "Am I part of that group or of any similar group?"
- "What interest does that person, or the people who compose the group, have in being generalized?"
The principle of my suspicion is the threat of being generalized to the extent that I am no longer represented, or that I gain an unjustified bias against another. In any of those cases, the result is prejudice and conflict.
So, while there are fair situations, in which many individuals can be represented in a group, such as the case of a family unit , there is the most common and abundant danger of misrepresentation!
Every time someone says or writes "we", or any derivative of it, a red light illuminates in my mind. It goes something like this:
- "Who are the individuals referred to, exactly?"
- "What are the definite and consistent properties of the group?"
- "Am I part of that group or of any similar group?"
- "What interest does that person, or the people who compose the group, have in being generalized?"
The principle of my suspicion is the threat of being generalized to the extent that I am no longer represented, or that I gain an unjustified bias against another. In any of those cases, the result is prejudice and conflict.
So, while there are fair situations, in which many individuals can be represented in a group, such as the case of a family unit , there is the most common and abundant danger of misrepresentation!
 |
| Not seeing the trees for the forest. |
Be the first to comment!