Scorn
The entire history of the human species has been one of evolution, both physical and intellectual. We have evolved intellectually by observation and experimentation. We watch how other members of the species are behaving. We listen to what they say and read what they write. We even observe the behavior of other species for clues. That’s how we managed to move from the middle of the food chain to the top. That’s how successful organizations stay viable.
With the development of the physical sciences, we approached some measure of settled truth. An hypothesis is repeatedly tested in controlled conditions in an attempt to disprove or modify its assertion. At some point, it withstands the tests often enough to achieve statistical certainty. Outside the world of physics and chemistry, the truth is harder to nail down, because we are unable or unwilling to conduct strictly controlled experiments. Even if we could arrive at a settled conclusion about human behavior, circumstances can change and render that truth obsolete. The search for truth and effective modes of action will last as long as the species lasts.
Our search for truth and effective modes of behavior, organization and policy takes many detours because we are less than fully rational and capable of amazing feats of rationalization. Worse than a detour is a roadblock. Scorn is a roadblock. Scorn means that the object of scorn merits no consideration whatever. Any thought or action of the scorned is dismissed as evil or terminally stupid. At its extreme, scorn means that the scorned individual or group is less than human and anything done to them is justified.
Scorn is a huge mistake and an exercise in intellectual sloth. No one of us is perfect . . . or perfectly evil. All of us are self serving to some extent (and a lot more so than our rationalizations will allow), act irrationally in some cases, and are full of unsupported preconceptions and prejudices. Almost all of us have learned something useful from experience and do some decent things. We all need to heed the injunction of MLK and judge others by the content of their character . . . all of their character. Alcoholics Anonymous has an astute recommendation for deriving benefit from the content of a meeting in a church basement: Take what you can use and leave the rest behind.
One of the major downsides of scorn is that it generates a response. Those scorned tend to respond with hostility. I believe that the main reason Hillary lost in 2016 is that her words and (more especially) her demeanor conveyed scorn for those whose political views didn’t match hers. The “basket of deporables” turned out to be a lot bigger than she thought it was.
Our political culture has descended to the point that each team is firmly convinced that the other team has NOTHING useful to say. To disagree with the received wisdom is to be EVIL. The proper response is a rush to the twitter barricades for a cancel session. We have suspended the search for truth and effective governance in its tracks to our detriment.
