why do many generalisations seem to arise out of negativity?

Post Reply New Topic

i had not noticed this before coming to WP, and it is not the case for all people. a great many are able to avoid generalisations at all, others generalise only in certain areas (i.e. only gender/politics/religion/ethnicity), still others generalise both positively and negatively, etc... but it is a general pattern overall that when generalisations are present in conversation they are usually negative.



example....

person X tries a doughnut for the first time. it is a jelly doughnut and tastes good. so person X freely states that s/he likes jelly doughnuts. s/he is open to trying other types but does not usually generalise to say, "i love doughnuts."

person Y tries a doughnut for the first time. it is a jelly doughnut and tastes horrid. so person Y freely states that s/he dislikes doughnuts. s/he is not open to trying other types because their attitude expands to include all doughnuts in a negative light.



once that negative generalisation is formed, it seems like person Y will seek out confirmation of his/her assumptions. if person Z eats a maggot-infested chocolate glazed doughnut, then person Y attributes it to the fact that all doughnuts suck. person X may decide that s/he doesn't want one from that batch but will likely be open to trying a chocolate glazed doughnut from another store or from another batch, and whether or not it tastes good to them will not affect their positive impression of jelly doughnuts specifically.

what i have found is that it is hard to combat negative generalisations because there isn't a polar opposite in most cases to balance it out. when person Y states that all doughnuts are bad, person X cannot/will not really respond that all doughnuts are good. the only argument is that doughnuts might be good or bad depending on the individual doughnuts themselves, or based on personal tastes. it is a weak argument (though true), and does not pack the punch that negativity holds.



anyways... please explain to me why so many people seem to generalise more often from negative experiences than positive ones... or if you disagree i am interested in hearing that too.

Evolutionary defense against poison.

person X tries a berry for the first time. it is a Current and tastes good. so person X freely states that s/he likes blue berries . s/he is open to trying other types but does not usually generalise to say, "I will eat all berries"

person Y tries a Berry for the first time. it is a Yew Berry and tastes horrid and cause staggering gait, muscle tremors, convulsions, collapse, difficulty breathing, coldness and eventually heart failure. so person Y freely states that s/he dislikes berries. s/he is not open to trying other types because their attitude expands to include all berries in a negative light.

People often generalize out of pure ignorance

there is nothing wrong with generalizations if you provide examples to back them up. (Even if your wrong or we disagree, I can at least see the context you are operating under.) Thats what tends to be missing when generalizations are made.

Why do many generalisations seem to arise out of negativity?

Because "fear" has much greater survival value than "joy".

Tadzio

Probably for the same reason that people love negative gossip. We construct exaggerated fables to warn against negative behaviors. Tips to avoid danger.

Or maybe there is just something in our nature that runs toward being exclusionary and negative. Put 10 people in a room for a day and they may not pick a leader, but they'll certainly pick someone to hate. Highlighted weekly on reality television.