12 Ways We Teach Each Other to Hate

 

We humans have always been a contentious sort. But now it seems we are devolving collective hate. Hate can be triggered or taught. From personal, corporate, or political agendas, we observe a widespread effort to challenge and denigrate others, and they in turn resent it.

Courtesy Uriel-Soberanes, Unsplash

Linguistics professor Deborah Tanner at Georgetown University has written a disturbing book, The Argument Culture. The thrust of her analysis of our culture is that people divide into competing camps and develop a compulsion to win arguments by criticizing and diminishing those in other camps. In discussing issues, people with differing views become considered as enemies that must be defeated.

In such wars, many tactics are used to bolster our own positions and defeat the enemy. Here are  12 ways we teach each other to hate:

 

1.    Egotism. We are egotistic and self-absorbed. What we think is more important than what others think. If others don’t agree with us, we need to let them know they are wrong, which of course they similarly respond.

2.     Absolutism. Our own views are seen as absolute and irreconcilable principles continually at war with alternative views of others, who we imagine as our enemies.

3.     Categorizing People. We assign identities to people and place them in categories. Thus, we make it more convenient to attack many people at once as members of an identity group. Divide and conquer.

4.     Polarization. We habitually think of issues of having just two sides of an argument. This inevitably polarizes the issues and creates two camps of competing enemies.

5.     Exaggeration. To justify one’s position, it helps to magnify the flaws in the positions of others, and even to denigrate their character for holding such unacceptable positions.

6.     Threatening body language. We use threatening body language in advancing our arguments with others. These include scowled faces, loud voice, punching the hand toward others (often with an object in hand), and pounding the arm up and down. We “get in their face.”

7.     Character assassination. The accuser assumes a false mantle of virtue signaling, which in turn is not appreciated by those accused of being morally deficient.

8.     Assuming victimhood.  Claiming unfair treatment allows us to accuse others of oppression and thus assign to them guilt and shame. Name calling is the linguistic first choice of weaponry. Another weapon is to recall past abuse, even when such abuse no longer occurs. Next, current examples of presumed abuse are magnified and harped upon. In that way, opponents become irredeemable. Those accused of creating victims in turn come to hate their attackers.

9.     Excuse making. A basic reason for assuming victim status is that it provides excuses. We don’t have to take responsibility for any of our own missteps that contributed to our misfortune. We save face by blaming others, and thereby create another reason to hate them. I explore all this in my book, Blame Game, How to Win It.

10.  Demanding equity. We expect equity, not just the equal opportunity of a level playing field. We assume everyone is equally entitled, irrespective of effort, education, or ability. Thus, when others deny us equity, we hate them for being unfair.

11.  Revenge. Sometimes, we create enemies out of jealousy or desire for revenge over perceived imposed inequity.

12.  Cancel culture. We censor or otherwise “cancel” others, which of course generates reciprocal hate.

 

All this shreds the fabric of social harmony. It creates resentment and anger that otherwise would not occur. It becomes self-perpetuating. I fear our current situation will only feed upon itself and make things worse. Is this the price are willing to pay to win arguments?

.

How Can a Country Learn from Its Erased Past?

I am reading a book about George Washington (Washington’s End) that is highly relevant today. Near the end of his first term, George decided he did not want to run for re-election. U.S. anarchists, inspired by the French revolution’s “reign of terror,” led Washington to conclude that Americans were unworthy of the government he and the other founders had created for them. Washington just wanted to get away from the rabble rousers and retire to his farm to enjoy his wealth. Then, as now, we were a country bitterly divided. Then, as now, large numbers of citizens wanted to cancel the culture of the American revolution. Jefferson convinced George that nobody else could hold our country together.

Today, Black Lives Matter and Antifa anarchists pose a similar test of citizen worthiness. Will we have the courage to stand up to those who threaten to “burn it all down” if we don’t give them what they want? Are we going to vote to sustain a government that gives us opportunity to care for ourselves or to exchange our freedom for a government that we hope will be our nanny?

Today’s voters are being tested for their worthiness. Their response seems to prefer a new “progressive” government to be our nanny. Our new government is spending money we don’t have to make life easier and better for everyone. The goal even includes providing public services to everyone outside our country if they will just come through our open borders. With that all that largess comes control, expressed in terms of cancel culture and political correctness.

Donald Trump, like Washington, could have just retired and enjoyed his wealth. But, like Washington, he sought an onerous second term in the hope he could save the country from destruction from within. Unlike Washington, Trump was rejected by the public. He faces great opposition from globalists who think it is wrong to put America first, that America is in fact a flawed and evil country.

We are supposed to learn from history, and this present generation has concluded that this history only shows all that was wrong with this country. By erasing this history, we eliminate the chance to appreciate how we have corrected so many of our past flaws. Canceled history prevents future generations from making the same mistakes. Canceled history prevents us from knowing what was good and right about our founding. We are told to begin anew. Will this fresh start prevent us from making new mistakes?

School systems throughout the U.S. have been negligent in teaching U.S. government philosophy and history. Students are being taught utopian Marxist ideas. Students are not being taught about the good things this country has done. I remember asking my grandson what he learned about WWII in his public high school. He said they only spent one class period on that. Most of the U.S. history instruction dealt with U.S. barbarism in the Vietnam war.

Decades ago, schools used to have civics courses that taught the philosophy and values of our founding and the God-given rights specified in the U.S. Constitution. Now, we have enemies of the Constitution. Freedom of speech is most obviously under attack. If you say things that are not politically correct, you may well be shunned and canceled. Book and magazine publishers are selectively rejecting manuscripts that express unpopular ideas. Conformism is the new standard not only for speech but general behavior as well. We are being herded like sheep into behaving the way our betters require. Communist China is becoming our new model for personal behavior.

The New York Times is sponsoring a new U.S. history curriculum called the 1619 project that asserts that the U.S. was founded as a systemically racist country. The evidence presented is that in 1619, a ship appeared near point comfort, a coastal port in the English colony of Virginia that carried more than 20 enslaved Africans, who were sold to the colonists. No aspect of the country that would be formed here has been untouched by the years of slavery that followed. On the 400th anniversary of this fateful moment, the Times says it is finally time to tell our story truthfully. Of course, the Times does not mention that this is not the whole truth of our history. The new curriculum aims to erase the whole truth of our history.

I just had a book published on truthfulness (Realville. How to Get Real in an Unreal World). We surely do live in an unreal world, dominated by lies, cheating, denial, delusion, deception, withholding, and pretense. All these forms of untruthfulness are being expressed by political activists who promote the agenda that all our history was bad and therefore needs to be erased. Worse yet, the cancellation has the hidden agenda of advancing control over us. It seems to be working as the activists intend.

 

Absence of Evidence Is Not Evidence of Absence

It is hard to realize the existence of realities that that we cannot see or measure. This was impressed on me when I recently visited a planetarium in which the audience and I viewed a map of the universe created by the Hubble space camera. The camera had taken many successive snapshots of the sky as it moved along its orbit, saving each adjacent shot side by side. The overall result, projected on the curved ceiling of the presentation hall, looks like a bow tie. If we did not know any better, we would think that the universe actually has this structure, with nothing outside the three-dimensional bow tie. The confusion arises if we don’t realize that the camera is located in the center of its horizon view. The camera’s horizon is constrained by its orbit. To get a better mapping, it would have to create maps from all points in all theoretical orbits around the earth.

 

In this case, the evidence for a relatively homogeneous three-dimensional universe caused a central black hole explosion is missing. We might erroneously conclude that the “big bang” theory is wrong. But absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. This principle emerges in another context when we say that certain phenomena are “immaterial.” Material things have a chemistry and physics, and things that do not seem explainable in those terms are often called “immaterial.”

 

What about things we call “abstract,” such as probability? Probability is not defined as a reality but rather the likelihood that a certain reality may emerge. In Shannon’s Information Theory, for example, “information” would not be regarded as a material reality as such but rather as the probability that a certain material event may occur. Indeed, information’s lack of material reality was probably why Shannon chose to define it the way he did. Probability ideas apply to much of the “spooky” aspect of quantum mechanics.

 

In the field of neuroscience, many scholars use the words “immaterial force” to explain consciousness. Yet, how can a force have the force of mediating our thoughts and willed action if it is immaterial? In the field of religion, many theologians use the word immaterial to explain the soul as some kind of immaterial form of being. How can something “be” and yet not be?

 

Neither case explains anything. In both cases, “immaterial” is intended to have the circular definition of not being material. What can this word possibly mean? To claim that something is immaterial is to imply that it does not exist. We know from personal experience that consciousness surely exists, and there are many good reasons to believe that souls exist too.

 

A fundamental premise of science is that all things are material, including those things that we cannot explain in material terms. Here is a list of material phenomena that were originally thought by many to be immaterial, because at the time there was no evidence for a material explanation:

 

·       The germ theory of disease

·       Immunity to infection

·       X-rays and other portions of the electromagnetic spectrum

·       Heat and cold

·       Gravity

·       Curved space-time

·       Quantum mechanics

·       Unconscious Mind

 

Quantum mechanics is of particular interest and relevance to this issue. Numerous experiments have demonstrated that observing something, even if just by a laboratory instrument, can make apparent physical realities we did not know existed. Matter can go from one spot to another without moving through the intervening space (called quantum tunneling). Information moves instantly (faster than the speed of light) across vast distances. Clearly, this does not reflect the kind of reality we ordinarily experience. Yet it exists.

 

Two explanations are possible. One is that the act of observation actually creates the manifest physical phenomena. Another is that the physical properties were pre-existent in inapparent form. Neither possibility makes sense in terms of our present knowledge. While many physicists can describe quantum phenomena, no one can explain them. Nonetheless, the facts are demonstrable.

 

What then is meant by material reality? Real things can seem unreal (immaterial?) under certain circumstances. This  perspective suggests that everything could be material, though sometimes that material reality may not always be apparent. Most likely, things we think of today as immaterial, such as consciousness and soul, are real material phenomena that we think must be immaterial because we have not yet discovered their material nature.

 

Science, by definition, MUST deal exclusively with material things. It is not possible for things to exist and yet not exist because they are immaterial. Thus, those who cling to immateriality are obliged to defend their position with compelling logic and evidence, if there were any. The rest of us are left with the conclusion that everything is material, though sometimes that material reality may not always be apparent. This surely can apply to consciousness and the soul. Considering consciousness or the soul as immaterial precludes any possibility that science is relevant to these phenomena. On the other hand, if consciousness and the soul have a material reality that is not yet apparent, then science might find evidence to help document and explain those realities.

 

Mind Control. You Can Have More Self Control than You Think

 

Who’s in charge in deciding what your brain thinks about? Many factors are involved, but you have more control than you might think.

Everyone has some degree of self-control that affects their beliefs, desires, thoughts, goals, plans, and feelings. Humans are unique in their capacity for self-control, which is generally assumed to arise from the relatively large frontal cortex in the brain. The neocortex even has a series of linked circuits that constitute an executive control system. Lack of self-control underlies many social and mental health problems. Failing at self-regulation can lead to obesity, addiction, poverty, sexual promiscuity, and other ill-advised behaviors. On the other hand, people with superior self-control are more likely to be "healthy, wealthy, and wise."

How do we learn such control? I identify five factors:

1.    Motivation

We are motivated by the brain's positive reinforcement mechanisms and our mental ability to adjust the set point for the level of reinforcement that satisfies us. Like a heater thermostat, if the setting is low, it doesn't take much heat to meet the demand. If the setting is high, we need more heat and for longer periods. How does one adjust the personal hedonistic set point?

One way to increase self-control is to have many alternative positive reinforcers that allow one to substitute "good" reinforcers for bad ones. Another way is to structure goals consciously so that achievement requires "good" reinforcers. You can seek the company of fellow beings who wish to share those same values and guidelines. Incentives matter.

2.    Mental Fatigue

Resisting temptation can be hard work. In secular life, we get refreshment from taking a vacation. Taking a vacation from resisting temptation is hardly the righteous choice. What then, do we do to refresh the self-control required for resisting temptation?

Capacity for self-control is apparently a "limited resource" that can be depleted. Replenishment takes time in which there are fewer demands. Maybe this is one advantage of vacations or retreats. Escape from tempting situations is akin to taking a vacation.

Our own negative thoughts wear us out. Distressing thoughts make it all too easy to obsess to the point of emotional exhaustion. Think of all the times you have lost sleep over something that troubles you. When awake, such obsession diminishes our productivity.  How do we inhibit such obsessive thought? Mental discipline is required. There are ways to train the brain to be more disciplined at screening out intrusive thoughts. One method, strangely enough, involves working-memory training tasks; these train the brain to focus and screen out distracting thought.[1]  Habitual intense prayer or meditation may do the same thing.

3.    Age

Young people usually have less self-control that adults. Educators assert that self-control in preschool-aged children is more associated with school success than is IQ.[2] Brain dysfunctions that alter self-control will increase impulsivity and often lead to anti-social and even violent behavior. Brain scans show that impulsive people have an abnormally small hippocampus and prefrontal cortex.[3] We don’t know if they were born that way or got that way by a lifetime of indulging their impulses.

Executive control capability may decline in the elderly, who may become less able to take care of their needs and control their life. A study of seniors (average age of 75) revealed a tendency for elderly to withdraw from social interactions, along with an associated tendency to become depressed.[4] Stress, which may well have a cumulative effect over the years, is compounded by the current stresses of old age. The adrenal-pituitary stress axis may be more active, resulting in a high blood pressure from adrenalin release and shriveling of neural synapses from excessive cortisol release.

Biochemical markers of inflammation increase with age. The cumulative stresses of a lifetime can cause increased anxiety, confusion, further stress, and depression. Thus, a vicious cycle of mental deterioration may ensue. In such a state, executive control fails, and the person may become helpless and dependent.

4.    Religion

"Mind over matter" is a central theme in most religions. The idea is that proper spiritual belief gives you the strength to cope with the vicissitudes of life. Paradoxically, the most religious people, like monks, may not use their strength of faith to cope with life but actually escape worldly stress by living in monasteries or nunneries.

Literature surveys reveal a strong relationship between religiosity and self-control. Self-control in religious people is manifest in that they tend to suffer less from depression, avoid trouble with sex or drugs, do better in school, and even visit the dentist more regularly. It is not clear whether religious experiences promote self-discipline or whether a self-disciplined person is more likely to respond to the self-control requirements of religion. It could be both. Whatever the case, to be mentally and spiritually healthy, we must learn to discipline our thinking, just as we discipline our body to improve our golf game or other physical skills.

An interesting survey of 213 people measured both the degree of self-control and religiosity.[5] People who believed in traditional religions were more likely to have motivational drive and strategic planning for their actions. Perhaps not surprisingly, people who had more superstitious beliefs were less likely to control impulsive behavior.

Prayer seems to be an active way to promote replenishment. A demonstration of this point comes from an experiment where subjects engaged in personal prayer or an equivalent time in free mind-wandering thought. A subsequent self-control test revealed superior scores for those in the prayer group.[6]

Adolescents seem to have less self-control than mature adults. One study involved 1,785 young adults of different religions (Muslims, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox- and Bible-belt Christians) in different countries.[7] Young people with intrinsic religiosity (living one's faith)  were less likely to exhibit deviant behaviors, such as theft, substance use, cheating, etc. than those driven by extrinsic religiosity (using one's faith for personal advancement). The religious beneficial effect was greatest in those who had low natural levels of self-control.

Most religions make a positive social impact by teaching and requiring self-control. Just thinking about God can improve our will power. One experiment demonstrated this in a trivial way by priming subjects with a pre-test task of unscrambling sentences that contained religious thoughts. The subsequent task was to drink an unpleasant mixture of orange juice and vinegar, for which they were paid for the amount they drank. Compared to a neutral-primed control group, the religion-primed group drank twice as much of the sour juice. In another part of the experiment, investigators told participants that when the study was over they would receive monetary compensation. If the participants came back the next day, they would receive $5, but if they came back a week later, they would receive $6. Even with the small $1 difference, a greater percentage of the participants in the religious-primed group decided to wait and receive the larger amount of money than those in the neutral-primed group.[8]

Some evidence indicates that people are more motivated toward good behavior if they view God as punishing rather than a God of love. In a study at Brigham Young University, Mormon students were assigned a task to button press when they saw a picture of juice or to inhibit the press when they saw a picture of beer (which their religion forbids). A neural signal over the anterior cingulate cortex that is known to be an error indicator became smaller when subjects were reminded of God's love instead of God's punishment. The interpretation was that focusing on God's love and forgiveness made students less worried about making mistakes in the task.[9]

One of the more obvious and measurable examples of religion effects is how it can reduce pain. A common way that medical service providers assess pain is to ask a patient to rate the intensity of pain on a scale of 0 to 10. In one experiment, 24 patients, half practicing Catholics and the other half avowed atheists, had been screened to have equal baseline pain thresholds. They were then given electrical shocks while staring at different images, some religious and others not. Pain scores dropped when viewing religious images, and non-religious images had no effect. Brain scans showed that when pain was reduced, the activity level was increased in the right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, a region that other investigators had shown was instrumental in driving top-down circuitry that inhibits pain.[10] A simple explanation is that the pain-relief is like that afforded when a dentist twists your cheek as he inserts a needle to anesthetize a tooth or a veterinarian slaps a horse's hip as he simultaneous slams a needle to inject a medication. In these cases, the signals that ordinarily cause pain are mixed with other dominant signals that limit the brain's ability to feel pain.

5.    Yoga/Meditation

Yoga is a practice that most clearly illustrates the ability of the mind to control the body. The most obvious effects of yoga meditation are on breathing, which can be dramatically slowed and made more abdominal, and the cardiovascular system, in which heart rate slows and blood pressure drops.[11]  Yoga masters can alter bodily functions in even more profound ways, such as forcing extreme sweating or lying on a bed of nails. Mindfulness meditation, wherein attention is focused on breathing or a mantra, promotes the development of attentional skills and changes neural activity related to self-control.[12

---

[1] Bomyea, J., and Amir, N. (2011). The effect of an executive functioning training program on working memory capacity and intrusive thoughts. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35(6), 529-535. doi:10.1007/s10608-011-9369-8

[2] Blair, C., & Razza, R. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Dev., 7(8), 2nd ser., 647-663. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x.

[3] Penney, S. (2012). Impulse control and criminal responsibility: Lessons from neuroscience. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 35(2), 99-103. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.12.004

[4] Boss, L., Branson, S., Cron, S., & Kang, D. (2016). Biobehavioral examination of religious coping, psychosocialfFactors, and executive function in homebound older adults. Religions, 7(5), 42. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel7050042

[5] Wain, O., & Spinella, M. (2007). Executive functions in morality, religion, and paranormal beliefs. International Journal of Neuroscience, 117(1), 135-146. doi:10.1080/00207450500534068

[6] Malte Friese, Michaela Wänke, Personal prayer buffers self-control depletion, In Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 51, 2014, Pages 56-59, ISSN 0022-1031, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.006.

[7] Klanjšek, R., Vazsonyi, A. T., & Trejos-Castillo, E. (2012). Religious orientation, low self-control, and deviance: Muslims, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox-, and “Bible belt” Christians. Journal of Adolescence, 35(3), 671-682. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.09.003

[8] Rounding, K., Lee, A., Jacobson, J., Ji, L., Religion replenishes self-control. (2012). Psychological Science, 23(6),  635-643.

[9] Good, M., Inzlicht, M., & Larson, M. J. (2014). God will forgive: Reflecting on god's love decreases neurophysiological responses to errors. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, doi:nsu096 [pii]

[10] Wiech, K., Farias, M., Kahane, G., Shackel, N., Tiede, W., & Tracey, I. (2008). An fMRI study measuring analgesia enhanced by religion as a belief system. PAIN, 139(2), 467-476. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2008.07.030

[11] Olex, Stephen, Andrew Newberg, Andrew, and Figueredo, Vincent M., (2013). Meditation: Should a cardiologist care?, International Journal of Cardiology, 168(3),1805-1810,

[12] Moore, A., Gruber, T., Derose, J., & Malinowski, P. (2012). Regular, brief mindfulness meditation practice improves electrophysiological markers of attentional control. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(18), 1-15.