Sunday, August 18, 2019

Problems with Racism



The problem with race and words related to race is the lack of a precise meaning and the attachment of strong emotions to certain terms like racist.

We can turn to dictionary definitions to find out how people generally use the words, but there will still be local applications that are far from what academics mean. Racist and racism mean different things, but it is certainly an insult in a democracy.

Race and Links to the past
Before the 20th century, scientists thought there were different races of human beings. People used to believe humans could be identified by race based on physical characteristics and people believed that traits like personality, intelligence, and morality were the result of their race.

The problem is, it is difficult to make a case for different races of human beings. Surface differences like shapes of facial features and skin color are not scientifically linked to traits like personality, intelligence, and so forth.

Besides, it is common knowledge that two people in love who have different physical appearances, mate and produce offspring who share characteristics of both parents. It doesn’t take a lot of pairings before many people have a mixed heritage.

Racism
Nowadays, racism refers to negative actions toward people considered to be of a different race. The negative actions include prejudice, discrimination, and antagonism. See for example lexico.com.

Racist
Calling someone a racist is an insult and usually means that a person has a pattern of acting in a prejudicial, discriminatory, or antagonistic way toward people of another race. Racists view their group as superior to groups labeled as of a different race.

One problem with the word racist is that human beings are often wary of people who do not look like they belong to the same group. Groups can be defined by skin color, but they can also be defined by cultural markers like languages, foods, clothes, and religions.

Another problem is the failure to consider ranges of beliefs and subtleties. People use the word racist as if it is an all-or-nothing thing. It isn’t all-or-nothing. Extremists make it look like all-or-nothing, but nonextremists may still hold less extreme beliefs that can make a difference if they are in a position to make laws, policies, and decisions about hiring, serving, or treating other human beings who look or appear different than people from their usual group.

Context
In the United States, race is often defined in terms of black and white–an obvious reference to skin color. Sometimes another race includes people identified as brown. Sometimes race refers to the perceived continent of origin like Africa, Asia, or Europe. If you live elsewhere, you may have different ways people refer to races.


Advertisement
Living Well- an integration of faith and the science of virtues on AMAZON


What Matters?

Fairness. In a nation or organization, the principle of fairness, usually considered as equality, is germane to peaceful relationships between people who appear to be from different groups. It is difficult, though not impossible, to change attitudes, but it is possible to enforce laws that require the equal treatment of all human beings when it comes to the benefits and punishments present in laws and policies.
Unfair treatment breeds discontent and even violence.

Language. The language of leaders also matters.

Leaders can use insults to “paint targets on the backs”
of people they do not like.

Leaders insult groups of people based on where they live, where they came from, or other characteristics that make it seem that the disgusting behavior of a few people from a certain place, or having a certain characteristic is true of others from the same place or having the same characteristic. Leaders can inspire people to greatness or terrorism.

Integrity. Let’s be straightforward. When leaders attack a few people, who acted in a deplorable way as if all people who are like those bad actors are also deplorables or less than human, society has a problem. People will be divided and fear those who look like bad actors. Integrity means refusing to suggest that all people who look like a criminal or “bad actor” is just as bad.

Vigilance. It will take strong opposition leaders to attack the language (not the person) who seeks to divide people into preferred and not preferred groups. Social leaders who care about living in a peaceful and nonviolent society will need to constantly speak out against attempts to divide people based on rhetoric that identifies certain groups of people as targets and simultaneously engenders hatred toward those targeted people. Free speech is of critical importance to a just society.

A free press is vital to bringing cases of discrimination and injustice to the public. However, one must also fight against both an over-zealous press and poorly informed writers on one hand and powerful leaders who discount carefully researched press reports on the other hand. Just societies will always need alternative voices from vigilant people.

Groupishness. Human beings constantly form special ingroups and reject some people who are by default in an outgroup. Any progress in racism won’t solve the problem of human nature in other areas of a culture. Sexism, genderism, ageism, ableism, ethnocentrism, and other "isms" are among the ways people band together and make life better for themselves at the expense of another group. Even in societies that purport to offer liberty and justice for all, enforceable laws have been important to protect the rights of certain minorities. Sadly, if your group is not listed as a protected group in law, you might not be able to count on justice or fairness. Of course, even if a minority group is listed as protected, it does not mean they will be protected when no one is looking.

Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton



Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)





Tuesday, August 6, 2019

Prayers and Thoughts Take A Hit


Prayers and thoughts have taken a hit lately.  In the wake of mass shootings in the US, I see more and more social media posts decrying the use of "prayers and thoughts" as if it were a meaningless phrase that substitutes for inaction.

Is there any evidence that prayer is helpful? 

That's hard to say unless you define what you mean by helpful. Clearly, whatever prayers have been offered, shooters continue to kill and injure many in the US and elsewhere. 

Believers in the effectiveness of prayer won't stop praying. People do report feeling better after praying. And believers who are the recipient of such messages often take comfort in knowing they are supported in prayer. For one thing, it's a reminder they are not alone.

Does prayer lead to inaction? 

Maybe. A study by Tyler Greenway, Sarah Schnitker, and Abigail Shepherd examined the relationship between praying and generosity. Here's a quote from their summary (2017).


Christian participants (N = 313) were assigned to engage in either intercessory prayer or a secular reflection over a 2-week period on the hardships faced by either Christians (religious ingroup) or Muslims (religious outgroup) in Myanmar/Burma being persecuted by the Buddhist majority. Contrary to hypotheses and previous research, multiple regression analyses revealed that the prayer condition was associated with less monetary generosity than a nonreligious control condition. (See the Abstract)
I realize of course that the researchers studied generosity and not action related to ending mass shootings; however, the study does illustrate the possibility that prayer may be a substitute for less concrete action. As is often said in academia, "more research is needed."

Do Christian survivors appreciate "thoughts and prayers?"
Perhaps it's complicated even for those who believe in prayer. Taylor Schumann is a survivor of a shooting. Writing in Christianity Today, she expresses a sensitivity to the phrase, "thoughts and prayers."
Like many others affected by gun violence, I can’t help but feel frustrated and cynical when I hear another line about “thoughts and prayers.”
However, she expresses a belief in the power of prayer and offers suggestions on what to pray. This leads to a research question, would social media comments be taken as more meaningful if the posts said how the poster was praying for the survivors and their families? This can be turned into a study--any takers?

What can we learn from Schumann?
One of my interests is in the psychology of religion. What I appreciate about Schumann's article is the prayer list. The list reveals a blow by blow flow of the path from shooting victim to shooting survivor. It's like a prayer for different stations of the cross borne by survivors. We get a sense of the enduring psychological trauma, social issues, and medical-biological struggles that can be a part of recovery.

Advertisement

Living Well- an integration of faith and the science of virtues on AMAZON

Does identity take a hit too?
Our identities are multiple and varied in importance. I wonder what happens to those injured shooting survivors who were strongly against gun control before they were shot. 

Owning guns and enjoying recreational use of guns is a part of the identity of many people. Attacking gun ownership is like attacking a person. It is a useless strategy designed only to strengthen the resolve of those who insist on their right to own a variety of weapons.

The idea of guns and identity has been articulated by a unique Presbyterian Minister, Rev. Deanna Hollis--she's the first minister of gun violence prevention. And she has some thoughts on what churches can do--worth a read (NYT).

Does faith take a hit too?
Imagine devout Christians who believe in the power of prayer, the belief that God is in control, and miracles of healing. They enter their cars and begin a journey with a prayer for God's protection. They walk into a store. All hell breaks loose. Bullets are flying. They take a hit. They're down, in pain, bleeding, looking up at the ceiling of an ambulance.

What's not evident in Schumann's article is a sense of a deep spiritual struggle. Clearly, many rely on their faith as they recover from any trauma. However, some lose faith or struggle with faith and the beliefs about God, security and protection. Terri Daniel addresses some of this in the article, "Losing Faith vs. Gaining Perspective: How Trauma and Loss Can Create a More Spacious Form of Spiritual Awareness."


Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton



Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)