The piece below helps us think about normative and descriptive dehumanization. Descriptive dehumanization is about how we describe or perceive someone—for example, viewing someone as biologically different and worthy of mistreatment. Normative dehumanization is the belief that someone is incapable of certain values or moral standards and therefore is immoral by nature. We discuss because we are exploring the impact of hate and corruption on society.
We have seen both forms throughout history from time to time. Most attrocities and collective wrongdoing have elements of dehumanization. The Allegory of the Clan is a learning thought experiment that explores combinations of dehumanization through race, religion, political beliefs, freedom of speech, etc. When we explore we learn. Some things we may agree with some we may not.
Within that system, people could misuse taxpayer dollars, access information they were not supposed to have, and go out of their way to protect corruption. There were other victims, yet people said nothing. There was coordinated misbehavior among witnesses, threats of violence, and other actions that allowed those misusing the system to continue. Witnesses silenced. In this learning scenario the courts knew about the wrong doing but victim dumped.
As a learning thought experiment, we are looking at a worst-case scenario. Eventually, the behavior did not stop because people suddenly developed stronger values or became committed to their oaths, human-civil rights, or a constitution. It stopped because they were getting caught. They had steak in the game. It opens up commitment to institutional health.
That is not how we want systems to operate. Systems are supposed to serve all people. When we begin dehumanizing others, we start creating a justification for treating them as though they are less deserving of rights, dignity, and protection. That can impact social and economic engagement and health. We all may suffer. So, we want to ensure that those who we put in positions of authority have the capacity to see all members of society as having value and are willing to uphold our shared values and serve the insterests of society (In Theory).
*The Allegory of the Clan is a philosophical, theoretical, though experiment so take with a grain or salt. There is no right or wrong so feel free do agree, disagree, propose alternatives, etc. It is modeled after Plato's Allegory of the Cave where the more we learn the more insight is gained.
Normative Dehumanization and the Ordinary Concept of a True Human
- Ben Phillips distinguishes between two forms of dehumanization: descriptive dehumanization and normative dehumanization.
- Descriptive dehumanization involves viewing someone as less than fully human in a biological or species-based sense.
- Normative dehumanization involves viewing someone as lacking a deep commitment to good moral values—the judgment that someone is not a “true” or fully human person in a moral sense.
- Across four studies, Phillips finds evidence that normative dehumanization is different from simple dislike and from denying that someone represents an ideal form of humanity.
- The research also finds that normative dehumanization is a unique predictor of intergroup hostility, suggesting that understanding moral judgments about who counts as a “true human” can help explain hostility between groups.
Phillips, B. (2023). Normative dehumanization and the ordinary concept of a true human. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 5, 100155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100155

