Put Humans into One Category and Classify What They Do – Look for Differences

Have you ever said to yourself, “I am a fool?” You might have failed to meet a standard and then classified yourself as such. We have structured our language on the notions that a thing is a thing and that something cannot be both one thing and not that thing. From there, we think in categories and generally exclude the middle. When we categorize, we usually do so based on similarity and then assume a particular act or quality is intrinsic and absolute to the thing we categorize. We consider our foolish display a fundamental quality inherent to our being or essence.

Categorizing has its place in our daily lives. It makes for efficiency, but it does pay to know we are categorizing and to remain aware of differences between similar things. Always bear in mind that the same “thing” can be classified based on many different qualities that are part of it. Today, we can put a person in the category of “a fool” because they displayed foolish behavior. Tomorrow, if they pull us back before we unwittingly step in front of a moving bus about to flatten us, we classify them as a “hero.” However, which are they, in truth, a fool or a hero? Are they both a fool and a hero, or are they neither? Is language limiting your appreciation of reality?

REBT and General Semantics

Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) imported a great deal of the work of Alfred Korzybski and General Semantics (GS). Both are systems for helping people to improve their reactions to a changing and complex world. Both agree that we tend to function more healthily through the regular use of precise language. What are some of their common recommendations?

Automatic Reactions – Stop and Think

Instead of reacting automatically, REBT and GS encourage people to see that they can slow down their reactions in many cases, and there is a great advantage to doing so. Both encourage people to cultivate an awareness of their cognitive-emotive-behavioral moment-to-moment functioning. We can develop the discipline to override our knee-jerk responses to numerous situations. I say many cases because some fight-or-flight reactions are highly adaptive. If you find yourself crossing a street and out of “nowhere,” a bus is coming towards you, you had better not think and reflect upon your thinking but react and get out of the path of that moving bus. This automatic response is healthy. It will keep you alive.

However, REBT and GS encourage you to stop and override automatic reactions when instantaneous responding is not required and could be self-defeating. In conversations, we might sometimes react with thoughts like, “You must agree with me. You are an idiot.” What is important to note is that you are overclassifying the person. You classify the individual according to a statement or position they are taking, an instance of observation, or even many different comments or actions. You are likely to categorize and then devalue the other person when you hold rigid attitudes.

Lumping People Into Categories Impacts You

Furthermore, it is good to ask yourself what your classification of the individual as an “idiot” leaves out and how classifying them as an “idiot” makes it harder to respond to them effectively. Is there a drawback to this orientation towards them? How does it impact your feelings? How does it change how you relate to them? It also behooves you to consider what classification at what level of generality is most helpful.

Adopting a Process Orientation to People and Life

REBT argues it is best to classify people as “fallible humans.” Let us have one category for all people. We make this argument based on the observations that people are not static beings but beings in a state of evolution throughout their lives. Furthermore, every individual possesses many qualities, traits, and characteristics. Because this individualized arrangement of qualities exists in all people, we can think of individuals as unique even when they share qualities with other members that may look, sound, act, or even smell like them. Finally, we can think of all of us as error-prone. It is difficult to envision anyone not having made a mistake or not capable of making one.

Our Incurable Error-Making Tendency

Furthermore, no matter how well and consistently a person may do something, the hand will slip, and variation will occasionally occur. Another way to put this is to acknowledge that we all possess an incurable error-making tendency. We do this in how we reason and behave, which keeps life full of good and bad surprises.

I am not suggesting we dismiss the critical differences between fallible humans. Differences exist, and when we note them, we relate to the individual, not the abstract category. We stay closer to the “facts.” We strive to remain more in tune with reality.

What are the advantages of this way of reasoning? We are better able to accept ourselves and others as we are. We tend to have healthier emotions in our day-to-day lives. We only classify parts of a person, ourselves, or others. We rate a person’s behavior as “foolish” but avoid thinking of them as fools, an abstract category. We do not categorize them and then devalue them as people. When we think this way about our foolish behavior, we tend to avoid the unhealthy shame that follows from classifying ourselves as fools. It is easier to accept yourself and others unconditionally when you think of people as fallible humans and only categorize and rate their parts, not their whole being. When we avoid classifying another person as an “idiot,” we avoid the unhealthy anger that comes from that derogatory classification. We remain open to learning from all people.

Wonderfulizing is Also Self-Defeating

Thinking in this more precise way also helps us avoid wonderfulizing, a different self-defeating way of thinking. When we wonderfulize, we take part or parts of a person, such as a desirable characteristic or set of features, and overlook the other less desirable characteristics they possess. We avoid the surprise and emotional letdown that sets in when the other person displays their fallibility. We avoid deluding ourselves into thinking we are dealing with a superhuman.

Adapting to an Ever-Changing World

In REBT and GS, we train people to think precisely. Both encourage us to see that there are no superhumans or subhumans, just fallible humans. In so doing, we facilitate better social relations and adaptation to ever-changing people and an ever-changing world. With this orientation, you are more likely to achieve unconditional acceptance of yourself, others, and life. People are processes and are a mix of good, neutral, and bad parts. Life is a mix of good, neutral, and bad moments. Strive to become aware of the abstract categories you lump people into and the similarities you use to categorize. More importantly, remain open to differences and look for those differences. The differences are there, and some differences make a difference. Remain alert to possible differences in the future. Learn to observe, note variation, and adapt to reality as it unfolds. Also, bear in mind that things change. No one can predict what we can do and how we will evolve. 

Leave a Comment