Author(s):
Auffarth, Christoph
We/Not-We 1. The most unambiguous and most simple way to ascertain one's own place in a complicated reality consists in dividing the world into ‘
We’ and ‘
Not-We.’ The social identity determining which individuals belong to ‘
We,’ and which as ‘
Not-We’ are to be left out, is constituted as the result of many criteria. After all, in many ways the members of a group are alike, while they are distinct in others. Culture operates precisely through the perception of difference. Since no individual case is unambiguous, dualism contributes to a perception into which all differences blend. It simplifies the lack of clarity of reality, narrowing it down to the one criterion, which must be valid ‘in principle’ ( Prejudices/Stereotypes): the world is divided into mutually exclusive alternatives. What is not to be found in the real world of life, since this actuality is far too complex, is reduced to a recounted, fictitious counter-world: the world of long ago, the story of the beginning, the world of heroes and villains, and in a few cultures also the world beyond, still more rarely the ideal world of the future. Dualism renders it difficult to perceive the variegated nature of the world at hand, but relies on the world recounted; what that world lacks in demonstrability, can be substituted by sacralization. Complexity and ‘modernity’ are reckoned as threats. The potential for action that results from dualistic thinking goes from dreaming of an unambiguous world—which renders personal decisions unnecessary—to the radical change of the world—accomplished in disregard of human beings, insofar as this purification involves ‘cleansing’ the world from evil elements to the point of genocide. But the dreamers are inclined to agree with the murderers: they are inclined to let them have a free hand, to…