Shayne said: On the other hand, I know a lot of people who are passive about evaluating people. It probably stems from this "who am I to judge" mentality.
That was a fascinating comment you made.
Ironically it has been my experience that the opposite is true. While the cliché of, "who am I (who are you) to judge" is thrown around quite often, I have found that it is usually done within the context of two or more people having a conversation/argument on an ethical issue. At some point, the participant that is *losing* that debate slings out that cliché. Now, I have come across people that literally live their lives as if that cliché was a moral axiom, but I have found them to be more of the exception than the rule.
In general, I believe that people tend to make far too *many* moral judgments about others, and to categorize them into their image of a particular type of group. These moral judgments are usually made on the 'fly' - without much or any evidence or proof. Thus Joe's article is spot on, in that it identifies this tendency among many people, and objectivist in particular. In my earlier post to you I used the word ‘evil’ - that was an error on my part, too strong of a word. Joe's example of an assumption of stupidity, highly flawed or mal-intentioned would be better.
By and large I would agree with you that generally speaking Americans are 'tolerant' of each other. It is not a question of their being 'tolerant' of other people - but rather whether they are positively of negatively predisposed towards other people whom they have only cursory of knowledge of. It is more a question of a persons 'attitude' towards strangers and people in general, than their 'conscious' evaluation of them.
Objectivist in particular, with their emphasis on intellectual pursuits and discussing concepts abstractly - often tend towards making sweeping judgments about people with a quick glance of the eye or after only a brief conversation. Because this philosophy attracts a greater than average number of educated, intelligent and insightful people, the judgments made with that quick glance are often assumed to be as valid as the ones that are made after scrupulous and meticulous study/observation. Furthermore, I need not tell you of the unfortunate history within objectivism of a tendency towards 'elitism'. The great gods from above looking down upon that mass herd of the oh-so-average. When objectivists are not careful, they develop a quite Neitzschean outlook on humanity; a tiny minority of Supermen plagued with a herd of stupid sheep.
The more I think about it, the more I like Joe's article - it may be among his best.
George
(Edited by George W. Cordero on 4/13, 7:11am)
|