Transcript Classification

Profoundly significant for how and what
we know, classification merits further
attention, as it has significant
implications in all areas of knowledge.
Scheming to classify
 Designate one person to
collect 12 objects with as
much diversity as
possible
 Get into groups of 5 or 6
 Each groups mission is to
classify those objects
into categories.
Rules
1.
Create 3 or 4
categories that will
accommodate all the
objects. Label the
category.
2.
Each category must
have 2 or more objects.
3.
Each object must
belong to one and only
one category
4.
Be as creative as
possible
 Each
group should describe their
classification scheme on a chart.
 The class will then critique each group’s
scheme.
 The scheme that best satisfies rule 4 is
determined to be the winner.
 In
the classification exercise you did, it is
common for people to classify objects
based on their uses, though also on the
material from which they are made, their
color, or some other category. In the real
world, specific industries would focus on the
objects weights or volumes, their market
prices, or their electrical conductivities,
schemes that might be of interest,
respectively, to shipping and moving
companies, insurance companies and
stores, and engineers.
People, too, can be classified in numerous ways. Just
take a minute to think about it. Campbell’s database
might classify you by your grade, age, nationality,
sex, latest standardized test scores, IB diploma
program courses, and projected graduation year.
Consider how your doctor’s office might classify you
or marketers. You might also think about what
characteristics police departments, researchers,
politicians, etc. would look at.
 Our perceptual and cognitive apparatus forces us to
group the things in our mental and physical spaces,
to help our brains keep track of every individual
thing.

 We
need to remain aware, though, that
there’s nothing permanent or universal
about any particular classification scheme.
Classification schemes are adopted
because they are considered useful by a
community of knowers. When the scheme
ceases to be relevant to our needs or
thoughts, we may change or abandon itthough many of the traditions and idioms of
our cultures may still preserve its traces.



We do not always classify each other inductively, sensitive to
the counter-evidence and the uncertainty of conclusions.
Sometimes the classifications have already been taught,
closed, and emotionally pre-judged. As we considered in
discussing sense perception, people tend to notice and
confirm what they expect.
Stereotypes abound. They simplify a complex world for us
and, in some contexts, create humor or effective satire.
However, they also encourage us not to see the grouped
people as they really are and not to recognize individual
variability within the group.
Thus, we may exaggerate some features of a group in a
disproportionate way, see only certain features, or assume
the existence of characteristics even if we have never
noticed them ourselves.
 Can
you think of stereotypes in our
society for different groups?
 When is a stereotype harmless?
 Have you ever felt insulted by
stereotypes held about a group to which
you belong yourself?
 What stereotypes did you use recently?
 When
the stereotype is held with
negative emotion, whether felt in silence,
or expressed in hostile language, it has
escalated into full-blown prejudice.
 Examining how perception, language,
emotion, and reasoning combine to give
us our beliefs about the world, however,
may be one step toward understanding
prejudice and setting the stage for
dismantling it.





How did you react to your results? Were you surprised? Angry or
hurt? Pleased? Discuss what you felt and why you think you felt
what you did.
Do you believe that your test results sat something about you that
you should pay attention to? Why or why not?
Do you think these tests are valid? When you first saw your results,
did you question or accept the test’s validity?
Give examples of the cultural messages that may support attitudes
linking a dominant group in your nation or culture with “good” or
“superior” attributes and a subordinate group with “bad” or
“inferior” ones. Are these attitudes generalizations that can be
called stereotypes? How can generalizations be distinguished
from stereotypes?
If some of our consciously held beliefs, attitudes, and values, are
undermined by what Gladwell calls rapid cognition (others call
this intuitive thinking or even gut feelings), what do suggest we
can do to combat jumping to (false) conclusions?