What you are referring to is heuristics. It's simplistic. Effective for wild animals that require processing of complex information quickly to escape predators for example, but not so much for civilised humans that require a greater deal of accuracy.

You demonstrated the ineffectiveness of the approach by assuming I'm a Democrat or even American.

The skill is in understanding the process, the flaw and developing a capability for critical thought. You'll get there eventually, hopefully.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You demonstrated the ineffectiveness of the approach by assuming I'm a Democrat or even American.

Actually I assumed you're a lemmy user, of which I've yet to meet one who doesn't generalize republicans whether the poster is american or not. Not without reason, mind you, many republicans are say, racist, though many are not. It serves as a damn fine example of exactly what I'm referring to and is also a generalization in and of itself, which doubles back to make my point again. I understand the process, and in fact at times see value in it rather than simply nature at work, the trick is knowing what to do with the generalization. Should you hate X because X usually Ys? No, but if Y is an undesirable behavior trait in X you should at least find out if they Y before becoming entwined with them somehow.

[–] CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

What?

Was that just an embarrassed verbal vomit?

You were wrong, and rather than admitting, or leaving it, you continue trying to spew words in the hope that you confuse and distract people from realising you were wrong. Are you that insecure?

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago

The point is we all generalize, the problem is not knowing how to apply it, and whether or not the generalization is perceived as good or bad is highly contextual. Feel free to not get it all you want, doesn't hurt me any.