A few months prior to Katrina I was able to witness one of the first Mardi Gras parades outside New Orleans. There were different race relations than in Northern California. While blacks seemed more friendly and outgoing than whites, there was also more racial segregation. The parade had strictly segregated floats and teams. There were only a few groups of white and black teens. A policeman harassed a black youth for hanging out with white girls.
While returning to my car, I noticed a group of people at a 7-11. I thought it would be interesting to inquire about race relations. One white girl spoke on behalf of them all and said, “Oh, it is getting better.” Although the police give you some trouble, it’s not too bad. I thanked her, and walked towards my car feeling happy and hopeful. It was nice to hear from someone who was overcoming past prejudices.
I was called back by the girl. “You claim to be from San Francisco?” She asked.
“Are they still letting gays get married there?” “Cause that’s so disgusting to me.”
Okay, maybe not all like-minded. Although she had learned a lesson in bigotry, she didn’t apply it to all people. My experience with destructive bigotry has been enough to make me believe that there is a common pattern. Bigotry against gays, Jews, blacks, Jews and the Irish, as well as the Italians, Chinese, and the Irish–I understand it. No form of bigotry is acceptable. You don’t have to do the same thing to gays as you do to blacks.
I hope that a disenchanted country will be able to do some generalizing in this election. We get distracted from the real reasons they are bad by focusing on Bush’s and Cheneys negative character. If they conclude that they are just bad apples, what is to stop other counterproductive people with different names from taking their place?
Everybody says “People who don’t learn the lessons from history are forced to make the same mistakes again.” But that statement isn’t completely missing the point. Yes, it is important to learn lessons. But the question is not how many lessons and what generalizations. We should not generalize from Stalin and Hitler to any more mustaches-wearing leaders. No more short people
We want to learn from the past and apply them in the future. Although this is a noble goal, it is not a good rule of thumb. You can’t use the future to guide your generalizations because it isn’t yet here.
“Son, I advise you to buy low and sell high, and learn today what works tomorrow.”
Our society’s rapid progress over the last few centuries is largely due to culture realizing that right-generalization is the key to success. Engineering and science are both attempts to automate the process of effective generalization. Here are some generalizations about generalization that can be applied to the next election in the hopes of encouraging this process, however slight.
Undergeneralizing: Sometimes, we don’t know enough to make a generalization. Bush voters who criticize the president tend not to defend their vote. Bush was a lemon, a rare exception among the fine products of the conservative movement. Kerry, Gore, and the entire liberal agenda would have been even worse. McCain will make things right. Abu Ghraib? A few bad low-level soldiers. There is nothing to learn and no generalizations to be made.
McCain claimed that Wall Street greed was the root of the economic crisis and that the solution was to fire the head SEC. He sounded like the uninformed leftists I used to know in the 1970s. It is not greedy people running big corporations that are the problem. It will all be great if you replace them with people who aren’t greedy like me.
Overgeneralizing: Litmus test radicals believe they have found the factors that you can use to generalize everything you need about a candidate. A Christian? Anti-abortion? Gay marriage? Divorced? A loyal spouse? Are you open to change? Are you a traditionalist? According to the Sufis, “He who is burnt by hot dairy milk goes on ice cream.” Some dairy products may not be as harmful to your health. Not all Christians are great leaders. Expert status can’t be earned by careful analysis, but passionate self-certainty. They have found the cause that is important. They have a prioritization for it not because they compare it with other issues, but because they are able to make a passionate argument for its intrinsic merits and isolated merits. It’s a fundamental human right, don’t you think?
Motivated generalization: An alcoholic contemplates what is causing his daily hangovers. Monday: Gin and tonic, Tuesday: vodka with tonic, Wednesday: whiskey with tonic and Thursday: rum with tonic. It’s clear that it is the tonic.
Generalization serves two masters. The other is our future selves. We want to learn from history so that we don’t repeat the mistakes. Another is our current gut instinct which prefers certain lessons to others. Future self of an alcoholic wants to avoid future hangovers. However, the alcoholic’s innermost desires to learn that alcohol is more likely to cause hangovers than tonic.
Also Visit: Presentation – Definition and Nature
