This writer in the past has admitted to a bias. To quote:
“… we, as humans, are wired to distrust the other, the foreign, the ‘not
us.’ … This proclivity might have been
useful in our ancient past when resources were scarce and boundaries between
peoples were necessary for survival.”[1] Whether this is exactly true, this writer
doesn’t know – he previously used the word belief, not knowledge, to describe
his bias. It puts into question the
notion that prejudices are taught.
He also made the point
that the nature of modern life is one of higher interdependence and any fear of
foreign cultures, nations, peoples, and other elements abroad can be – and usually
are – disruptive and counterproductive. To
boot, it is unjust in that it is prejudicial.
Of course, a viable civics education program would need to address this
bias and question its reliability.
Good
civics instruction should, by extension, encourage beliefs and actions
reflecting functional levels of tolerance if not downright affection for varied
modes of living. Therefore, to the
extent that we express or act upon our natural fears and related prejudices
about the other, the foreign, the “not like us,” [the Them], we are failing to
provide good civics instruction.[2]
But all this doesn’t add
much information concerning the original bias.
Well, since those words were written, this writer has become aware of a
trove of research that bolster this suspicion.
One of its contributors, Susan Fiske, has done both experimental work
and theoretical work that zeroes-in on this area of concern.
She has found that if
pictures of alternate-race-faces are shown to babies, there is a brain reaction
noted through imagery that does not happen when same-race photos are used. And the parts of the brain that are “fired
up” are parts that do not engage in reflective thought. They are parts that are associated with
reflexive reactions.
Here is how the bio-scientist, Robert M.
Sapolsky, summarizes it:
The core of that thought is Susan
Fiske’s demonstration that automatic other-race-face amygdala responses can be
undone when subjects think of that face as belonging to a person, not a Them. The
ability to individuate even monolithic and deindividuated monsters can be
remarkable.[3]
Hence, civics education has a definite responsibility to broaden students’
perceptions of the Us to include more of the Them.
One last word: apparently the 2016 election results
reflected more of a Us vs. Them concern than what is usually cited, economic
anxiety. This ran across other factors
such as education or geographic location.
More specifically, the factor that provided the most power in
determining voting was anti-black animus.[4] This
is not an editorial comment on the election, but it bolsters the claim that
this factor does provide a definite civic concern and one that civics education
should address.
[3] Robert M. Sapolsky, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst
(New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2017),
628. (emphasis in the original) Could
this be a sub text in the story, Beauty and
the Beast, or the current feature film, The
Shape of Water?
[4] Sean McElwee and Jason McDaniel, “Economic Anxiety
Didn’t Make People Vote Trump, Racism Did,” The
Nation, May 8, 2017, accessed January 8, 2018,
https://www.thenation.com/article/economic-anxiety-didnt-make-people-vote-trump-racism-did/.
No comments:
Post a Comment