Quote:
Quote by: Technosoul  So we can stereotype everyone who uses a catch-all word as being lazy thinkers? Or is that a lazy way to classify people use such words? |
There is a difference between stereotype, which is based on primarily unfounded prejudgement, and passing mental judgement based on facts present at the time.
Notice that I did not say that people who use words like "suck" or "gay" as catch-all terms are lazy thinkers. I said that the use of such words is a lazy manner of speaking.
If I met someone and every fifth word out of his/her mouth was the word "gay" then I would be building my mental case that, because of the lazy manner of speaking, this person may also be a lazy thinker in general, but I would need more proof before I made a mental judgement. And my judgement is always open to change based on what that person says or does in the future. Although, if I was interviewing the person for a job that required a precise manner of speaking then I probably would not hire him/her.
A stereotype for the same situation would be if I assumed the person used the term "gay" as every fifth word because he/she appeared young. If I had the stereotype that young people have lazy manners of speaking then I would be applying this judgement to the potential employee before he/she even greeted me. If I was a lazy thinking stereotyper then I would not modify my judgement about the person even if he/she didn't use a single catch-all term in our entire discussion.
Letting the application of stereotype cloud judgement before there is any valid evidence, and not changing judgement based on new evidence, is lazy thinking.
We do use stereotypes every day as a basic part of human survival, as Flip points out, but we also validate these stereotypes with a constant flow of evidence and ultimately make our choices based on the evidence and not the stereotype.
Extreme Example:
I am thirsty and I see a plastic bottle of clear liquid on the table. It fits my initial stereotype of water. I pick it up and drink the whole thing.
Now, a lazy thinker is doing the equivalent of guzzling what they think is water even if they are getting conflicting information. For instance, they notice the liquid isn't labelled. They notice the liquid has a strong smell. They notice the liquid has an unpleasant taste. The lazy thinker drinks it anyway.
The danger of stereotypes is just that. Some people will adhere to the initial judgement of their stereotype regardless of the presence of other evidence and they will not actively seek out additional evidence because their mind is already "made up."
Critical thinkers are primarily analyzing evidence, searching for new evidence, and changing their internal judgements based on the evidence at hand. A critical thinker may smell the liquid even if it is in a bottle labelled water. They may take a tiny sip first even if the bottle is factory sealed. Critical thinkers primarily base their judgements and actions on evidence.