The Nature of Prejudice

I came to this book after reading Demagoguery and Democracy. I must say, I am absolutely stunned that this isn't more well-known, let alone that I had never heard of it before! When it comes to the nature of prejudice indeed, it's not only easy to read and well-thought/ researched but, also, still highly relevant nowadays despite it having been first published 70 years ago. What about it?

Gordon W. Allport sees prejudice as errors in thinking. It's not about being stupid or irrational. It's merely about adhering to various cognitive processes which are flawed, hence that can only lead to flawed conclusions. He outlines, for instance, some of its key features and how they can be reinforced by whose holding them (e.g. generalization show more fallacy; categorisation; monolithic thinking; selection and confirmation bias etc.). As such, then, he clearly demonstrates that prejudice is about psychology or, more precisely, personality. But that's not it.

More than outlining what makes what he calls a 'prejudiced personality', he also compares it to what makes its opposite, that is, the 'tolerant personality'. He refers to it as being 'tolerant', not because such personalities cannot be victims of prejudicial attitudes too (on the contrary!) but because, when they are, their way of thinking make it easier for them to see their errors and so to correct their own biases. Tolerant personalities, in other words, emphasise individualities over group membership; they don't categorise; they are open minded and so don't feel threaten when challenged in their assumptions; and, most importantly, they are warry of and reject generalisations. Does it matter?

Gordon W. Allport shows more than the various mechanisms adopted by prejudiced people when challenged, and so preventing them to change their mindset. Anyone who has debated somebody making swift generalisations about a group and to paint say group as being threatening and/ or a problem will reckon, here, the attitudes (e.g. self-righteousness, selection bias, bifurcation etc.). As it turns out, they are textbook indeed. What he does, too, is to show how dangerous such prejudicial thinking, its key features in reasoning, and its adopted defence mechanisms when challenged can be when being validated by society as a whole. Writing post-WWII and in the 1950s, his examples are mainly centred around racism and antisemitism. Nevertheless, they are striking for demonstrating how prejudice operates on a spectrum, ranging from what he calls antilocution (language used to negatively define, mock and/ or dehumanise a group); avoidance (when manufactured fear and distrust have become so divisive that they have alienated groups against each other); and discrimination (which is self-explanatory e.g. racial segregation; Nuremberg's laws etc.). When exploited to its full conclusion, it can also lead to physical attacks and, even, extermination.

The Nature of Prejudice, then, makes for a deep and highly enlightening read. It's mostly about psychology and what make a prejudiced personality, but not only. By showing how flawed reasoning and fallacies can be exploited at higher levels (e.g. mediatic, political, institutional) it also shows how dangerous, divisive, and alienating prejudiced ideologies can be, threatening thus communities and the very fabric of our societies, besides causing considerable damages among the targeted demographics. The author, in fact, goes quite far on that score, arguing that prejudicial attitudes being tolerated and let loose are nothing but anti-democratic at the core, hence a poison to be reckon with. He proposes, here, some solutions to prevent individuals to falls into prejudicial claptraps; the biggest one being, of course, education when it comes to fallacies.

All in all, here's a book which should be read by anyone concerned about critical thinking, democracy, and the building of a truly compassionate, inclusive society, away from the categorical, monolithical and rigid thinking of demagogues (e.g. "they/ us", "'they' endanger 'us'", and other divisive claptraps). I highly, highly recommend it! show less