You can see this at Buckingham; the majority of black kids are caught up in the whole hip-hop culture.
I kind of hit a rabbit trail there, but you can understand: The person displaying the prejudice shows the ignorance of that person.
Most kids get their prejudice roots from their parents at a very young age; it can come from a ton of different situations where the parent makes a comment, joke, etc, about a certain group. It also can come from the environment, in which the child grows up, and different situations that the child is involved in or witnesses. That being said, it is not an excuse for the person to be racist against the entire group, be it ethnic, social, or any other grouping. So, when someone judges another according to the group that they are associated with, this is completely erroneous, and it shows that the judger is basing his evaluation of that person off a general consensus.
This is basing your judgment off of a collective: We live in a semifree capitalist society today. As stated in the Constitution, every American has these rights: There is a huge philosophical discussion that I could go into about that statement alone, but I will refrain. Those rights are all that we need as free citizens in a government that has limitations the Bill of Rights.
There are a few things that could be done to lessen prejudice in America today. One of the first things I would suggest we do is to teach all the youth to never judge someone based on the group they are associated with, but to only judge them based on their productive ability. This would have a domino effect: This would, in turn, generate smarter kids from the educational system: Since we live in a capitalist society, everybody relatively has the same chance — when going to a job, you are hired on your ability.
If the education system was graduating the majority of kids that were extremely smart, this would raise the competition to get a job. This would mean that jobs suddenly become harder to get, and only the highly qualified would be getting all the jobs. This could all happen if each individual taught their children that they need not judge on skin color, clothes, or social status, but judge on productive ability.
In conclusion, there is no way that prejudice will ever be abolished in any society; it is futile to even try. As you can see from the previous paragraphs: I am very sure that few members of the Ku Klux Klan originally felt as if whites are superior to all other races. They simply felt as if they would fit in better and would be more popular or on a higher level if they believed such ideas. As the Klan gained members, it became more powerful and an increasing number of people felt as if their lives would be improved if they joined the group.
Parents and schools need to teach children that people need to have courtesy and kindness towards others, no matter what. People join these racist and religiously biased groups because they feel it will make their lives better, not caring about the others who will be affected by their hatred. Parents need to instill in their children the value of one treating others as they, themselves, would like to be treated truly are.
If everyone in this world had respect for one another, we would live in peace and be able to let others believe in what they wish and accept that everyone is different. The hostile acts of the outgroup are remembered while the friendly acts are forgotten.
The child learns to acquire the prejudice towards other groups. Initially we find small children do not have any feeling of discrimination. Small boys and girls, children of upper class and lower class, rich and poor families, play together.
But gradually they learn to discriminate. Thus, only when children grow up they learn to treat the children of other groups as different from them. Prejudice is a product of social learning. It grows in the minds of men mostly linked to political, geographical, legal and economic issues and are of less psychological significance. The white black feeling started with a very simple economic practice.
When there is a change in social conditions, revolution arises which gives rise to prejudice. In societies, in which intergroup and intra group relationships are based on political and economic power and are not integrated or planned there necessarily arises a scale of social distance which becomes incorporated in the individual members.
The famous study conducted by Clark and Clark on Negro children of 3 to 7 years age suggest that even at the age of 3 years children are perceptually able to discriminate the white child from the black child. But they do not, at this stage, develop any preferences, hostilities or prejudices. As they grow because of the exposure to various experiences in the society, they learn to develop prejudices and feeling of discrimination to children of outgroups.
So, prejudice develops with the growth of personality. Clark and Clark conducted the above mentioned experiment to verify the hypothesis that hostility to out groups is innate but it takes time for this hostility to develop because of the immaturity of the sensory experience. These children were presented with 4 dolls, two of which were brown with black hair and two were white with yellow hair. Most of them could discriminate between the white and Negro children.
The most interesting fact is that at this age level, they did not show any preference, prejudice or hostility. It is, thus, obvious that as children grow, they are exposed to certain experiences and training at home and society. Therefore, they learn to develop prejudices to the children of the outgroup.
Horowitz and Horowitz interviewed a few white children in a Southern Community and noted that many children said that they were punished and penalised by their parents and relatives for not dissociating themselves from the Negro children.
Actual conflict between the ingroup and outgroup infinitely adds more effectively to the intensification of prejudice. Once a superior group starts a prejudice, scientists, philosophers and politicians come to justify it. Hitler created the prejudice that Germans can rule the world. Thus, prejudice develops in the same way as attitudes and stereotypes grow in the minds of a person due to social influence.
Growth of prejudice mostly depends upon the family members, societies, tradition, customs, myths, legends, stories, faiths and beliefs. It further grows with the growth of social distance because of the development of attitude and prejudices. If the social distance is high, prejudice is more and vice versa. There is always prejudice of the Americans towards the Turkians, Indians towards Americans, though not one American in a thousand knows anything about the Turki.
This is because of the historical conflicts between the Mahamadians and the Christianity. A study based on interviews with persons released from a cross section of the American Zone showed that women are significantly more biased against the Jews than men.
Small town people, uneducated people are found to be more prejudiced than those of large cities and educated people. Prejudice is found to be greater among people with low status in society. Many studies indicate high levels of racism among lower class whites who may feel that blacks will take away their jobs. One of the basic reasons behind the development of prejudice is stereotype. The conditions and expectations assigned to members of group simply on the basis of the membership in those groups lead to prejudice.
Stereotypes are over simplification of facts which are used to add meaning to certain facts out of a complex social environment.
In the process, the important differences that distinguish one person from another is lost sight of. Today, the pressure is more on social and economic stereotypes in the development of prejudice.
Smeelley and Bayton found that beliefs about social class provided more powerful stereotypes than did beliefs about race. Similarly, sex stereotypes lead to sex prejudices. Some emphasise the role of self fulfilling prophecy to the development of prejudice. It means expectations about the possibility of further events or behaviours that act to increase the likelihood that the event or behaviour will occur. If people assume that members of a certain group are lazy, they may act in a way that actually elicits laziness on the part of the members of that group.
Cultural factors play a very important role in the development of prejudice. Sociologists and anthropologists have emphasised the tremendous impact of socio-cultural factors in the growth and development of prejudice and discrimination.
Increasing urbanization and population complexity of the society, competition and rivalry among different ethnic groups help in the development of prejudice of one group towards the other. When certain minority or disadvantaged groups are provided with the advantage of reservation in admission to educational institution; in jobs and in various elections to political system, the unreserved category develop prejudice towards these groups. Social factors, such as these would ultimately increase prejudices on the part of the people who feel that they are being denied a resource that is rightfully theirs or they are being debarred from their due which is rightfully theirs.
People also develop prejudice to have self regard and conformity. Many of the beliefs and attitudes occur to satisfy the specific needs of an individual. The environment also contributes a lot to the development of prejudice. When poor and uneducated people remain in small, dirty, clumsy cottages, rich and educated people develop stronger prejudice towards them.
The prejudiced person lives in an environment which provides a lot of support for the development of prejudice. Through the operation of the principles of similarity and proximity, certain sociological cues develop which serve as environmental support for the development of prejudice through beliefs and attitudes.
Prejudice exists in all, it is an universal phenomena and seems to persist in all societies, though, recorded history from age to age. The question now arises how so many people develop this particularly towards people belonging to specific social groups and the outgroups.
Factors contributing to the growth and development of prejudice have been extensively investigated in India as well as abroad. Studies on prejudice have been made on the sociological, cultural, psychological determinants of prejudice.
Socio-economic status usually show a positive correlation with antisemitism. But the relationship between socio-economic status and prejudice against blacks is not significant. The most common finding is that individuals of low socio economic status are most likely to have unfavourable attitudes towards blacks. On a follow up study-Gilbreth found that Princeton students checked many of the same traits for national groups in that Katz and Barely measured in Hartley has found the same pattern of social distance in that Bogardus had found in The findings that there were more anti Negro prejudice in the South than in the North car be explained interms of differential impact of cultural norm.
From three major psychological theories of prejudice, such as frustration, aggression, authoritarian, personality and belief congruence the effect of personality variable on prejudice is obvious. Furthermore, this psychodynamic approach holds that prejudiced individuals are more susceptible to frustration. The free floating hostility which cannot be expressed directly due to social restrictions is vented at an alternate target. The minority group in many cases becomes the likely scapegoat as it is probably less powerful than the original source which created frustration by blocking the satisfaction of a desire.
A person who feels secured about his job, position and status in the family or society takes an objective view of the situation that he comes across. But a person with feelings of insecurity tries to find out an individual upon whom he can put the blame of his insecurity. Allport and Gough a, b, c have reported that persons with high level of insecurity arc likely to show higher level of prejudice. Many investigators, including Rokuch , Siegat , point out that more anxious individuals display higher levels of prejudice than less anxious subjects.
Frenkel and Brunswik found that children high in prejudice tended to be intolerant of ambiguity and dichotomous in their thinking about sex roles. Because of the ambiguity of the subject or issue, people perceive them as they are asked to perceive. So, they develop prejudice towards such objects. Thus, the very perceptual processes create these environmental supports. Ambiguity of physical traits, behaviour traits and as a result the distorting perceptions, has substantial effect on the development of prejudice.
Rokeach attempted to explain, prejudice on the basis of individual difference in the ways of organising belief and disbelief system. Persons with high level of prejudice belief and disbelief systems are rigidly organised whereas in other individuals the systems are relatively flexible. According to Freud, man is born with aggressive and destructive tendencies and the desire for war is quite unconscious.
Human beings can live together peacefully only when this innate destructiveness is turned inward. Glover, a psycho pathologist says that unconsciously motivated sadism, machosism may indeed be the essential cause of world tension.
Studies by the UNESCO on social tension have been done on a large scale to determine the causes and remedies of social tension. The book Authoritarian Personality suggests that prejudice is a result of a particular set of characters shared by authoritarian personality.
Authoritarians displace their hostility towards weak or unconventional groups i. But, further studies also show that people who score low on the authoritarian scale may be very prejudiced. Personality factors, like rigidity, superstitionsness, intolerance, lack of liberality and dynamicity are responsible for more prejudice.
Prejudice on the whole is caused and determined by the interaction of the socio-cultural Factors with the personality traits. Prejudice is caused due to struggle and unhealthy competition over jobs, good school, housing and living facilities, high status in the society, money, social prestige, desire for power and recognition.
During competition, they come to perceive each other in various negative ways. They consider each other as enemies, they think their own group as totally right and their opponents as totally wrong. Initially which started as a simple competition gradually grows to strong prejudice.
Several studies have provided evidence to this view. The study of Blake and Mouton on corporate executives and Sherifs several studies in this regard are notable. People usually divide the social group in which they live into two clear categories i. Clearly differentiated contrasting feelings and beliefs are generally marked in the minds of the members of the ingroup towards the outgroup and vice versa. Tajfal and Turner support the above facts. The subjects in the above studies, by and large, indicated more negative attitudes towards members of outgroups and treated them in less favourable ways than members of their own ingroups.
What is an ingroup? Persons try to elevate their self esteem by becoming identified with specific social groups. They perceive these groups superior and better than other competing and rival groups.
Since, all individuals in a society are subject to this, everyone is bound to develop some prejudice. Thus, prejudice arises out of the clash or conflict of social perception. Prejudice grows due to social learning in the same process, like attitude and stereotypes.
Children acquire negative attitudes and various prejudice towards specific groups, institutions and stimuli as they are exposed to such views by parents, teachers, playmates, friends, and relations or because they are specifically rewarded for adopting them.
A negative attitude automatically develops towards those people shown in dirty dress, unclean dialapated cottages, growing in poverty and illiteracy, uttering faulty languages.
Recent studies of Liebert-Sparkin and Davidson and Bandura reveal the strong influence of mass media and T. The key process of social cognition refers to the fundamental ways in which one thinks about other persons. Among them stereotypes, illusory correlation and the illusion of outgroup homogeneity are noteworthy. For interpreting and processing social information, stereotypes function as a negative schemata and cognitive framework. The negative earlier knowledge and belief of specific social groups strongly affect the way in which one deals with further informations.
For example, Dovidio, Evans and Tyler have found that informations relevant to a particular stereotype is accepted and processed more quickly than informations not related to that stereotype.
You have heard and believed a particular nation is war minded. When you get an information supporting this belief you immediately believe and accept this and act upon it within no time. But when you get an information contrary to your already existing stereotype notion, you may not accept it, process it and act upon it. Similarly stereotypes lead a person to pay attention to specific type of information or the input that is consistent with the existing stereotypes.
Even we remember those informations and inputs which suit our purpose and are consistent with our stereotypes and forget those which do not tally with it. The rest he prefers to forget. Operation of such negative schemata has got support from the recent studies of Dovidio, Evans and Tyler , Greenberg and Psyzoyaski Illusiory correlations which appear to play some role in the growth of prejudices and stereotypes as found by Spears, Vander Plight and Eiser develop due to the basic tendency to give more attention to unusual and distinctive events.
It refers to perceiving the relationship between factors or variables that actually do not exist and obviously this perception of not existent things cause prejudice. The tendency to perceive all the members of the outgroup as all very much alike and homogenous reflects a fundamental bias in the way we think about other and so prejudice is grown because of this even if there is lot of contact.
Park and Rothbart have observed that even males perceive all women having similar qualities and attitudes and females perceive all men having homogenous qualities and attitudes though, these two sex groups always come in intimate contact with each other. These factors explain the causes and determinants of prejudice and also hint as to why prejudice inspite of all efforts persists.
Some psychologists have attempted to trace the causes of prejudice from motivational and personality aspects through the frustration, aggression or scapegoat theory. It is said that those people who experience continuous free floating aggression are likely to develop more prejudice.
Accumulated tensions arising out of frustration of various basic and particularly significant needs often find expression in aggressive acts. When this aggression is directed against a group as the target, it turns to prejudice. Miller and Bugelski have demonstrated that the frustration of even relatively unimportant needs like seeing a movie in a theatre lead to racial antipathy.
The history of growing up and being in an adult modern society is a history of constant and continuous frustration. Every human being is subjected to constant frustration from the moment of birth till death and birth itself is said to be the greatest frustration in human life.
When people find themselves frustrated in some way, they may turn their hostility towards a socially acceptable substitute i. Competition between groups and the very fact that members of another group are different, may also cause prejudice. Most social psychologists hold the view that all the racial prejudice can be attributed to the frustration aggression sequence which reflects the motivational causes of all prejudice.
But, since, all frustrations do not lead to aggression and there are other reactions to frustration besides aggression, it is not possible to say that all people who are prejudiced suffer from frustration. Hence, besides, frustration and aggression there are also other causes of prejudice. Racial prejudice is found among the sadists and in persons with free floating aggression.
Pathological personality systems like paranoia is found to be related to prejudice. A paranoiac has been described as person who is not capable of understanding other people and who continuously attributes all types of motives to other people. He seeks for people as a target of his aggression. But the reverse is not true. All mentally sick people may not necessarily develop prejudice.
Essay on Prejudice and Pride in Pride and Prejudice - Prejudice and Pride in Pride and Prejudice In any literary work the title and introduction make at least some allusion to the important events of the novel.
Prejudice Essay Different kinds of Prejudice Today One fact that everyone can agree on, regardless of where they live in the world, is that people are different.
Essay # 5. Functions of Prejudice: Prejudice creates all sorts of misunderstandings and dangerous gaps between persons, groups, nations and nationalities. It is the root of cold war, jealousy, quarrel among persons, societies and nations. All round development of society is blocked due to the development of strong prejudices. However, prejudice runs much deeper than a person’s color. Prejudice is found between gender, religion, cultural and geographical background, and race. People have discriminated against others based upon these attributes from the beginning of time.
Join Now Log in Home Literature Essays Pride and Prejudice Pride and Prejudice Essays Theme of Pride William Park Pride and Prejudice. In the novel Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, she displays a stark contrast between two characters in the story. Austen does so by discussing the theme of pride throughout the novel. Dec 06, · Essay on Prejudice December 6, Posted by sdpurtill in Uncategorized. trackback. This is my December essay that I had to write for school. I liked the topic, so I decided to post it. Prejudice. We will never be able to measure the full effects of prejudice: I think it affects everyone, even if it occurs at a subconscious level.