With comprehensive information, the situation is completely different.
For example, if you have a good friend in reality, you are a user who often taunts Tik Tok on the Internet, and one day you suddenly find that friend watching Tik Tok. I believe that people with a little emotional intelligence will not be so cynical as online, but will be silent.
At this time, your original values-everyone who plays Tik Tok is xx, which conflicts with the fact that your friend plays Tik Tok. Your understanding of your friend makes you know that he is not a disgusting or annoying person (if he is, he will naturally not become a friend), but he is doing something that you think will definitely affect you. At this time, people's normal thinking should be-why is he doing something I can't say, but it doesn't reflect the bad characteristics of Tik Tok users on weekdays? At this time, there is a contradiction in logic. "I" understand that not all users of Tik Tok will be bad and dissatisfied, and naturally understand other users of Tik Tok and understand that everything is not absolute. For example, there are some high-quality players who play tweeters in Mile Mile. They understand that the difference in using social software does not represent the quality. ?
With this comprehensive understanding of information-all the advantages of friends on weekdays, you can easily break the chain of discrimination caused by focusing on people one-sidedly-people who play Tik Tok are xx.
The same is true of racial discrimination. If you discriminate against black people and think that they are all xx, and happen to know an excellent black person, he may be more capable than you. The logical conflict caused by this comprehensive understanding of information will make you abandon the concept that black people were xx before. Racial discrimination naturally ceases to exist.
Sadly, many people can't fully understand the information all their lives, so they can only entertain themselves in their own small circles, and insinuate people in other circles with people in the same circle. They have no chance to understand at all, and they can only look at things one-sidedly without knowing their ignorance.
The other kind of people are extremely narrow-minded.
Here is a very suitable example: Javert in the tragic world. As a policeman, he strictly enforced the laws that were unreasonable at that time but were regarded as just by him. Even though he fully understood Jean Valjean's kindness and even helped himself, he insisted on arresting him. This extreme narrowness and stubbornness is really helpless. In reality, such people do exist. In the face of such people's refutation, there is no need to ignore it.
See more about the world, meet more people and read more books. Naturally, you will not discriminate against a certain group, and naturally you will understand others.