Difference between revisions of "Narrempiry"
From Categorism.com
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
* ''[[antimuslimism]]'': Muslims are terrorists, as proven by media talking about terrorists who are Muslims or assumed to be Muslims. | * ''[[antimuslimism]]'': Muslims are terrorists, as proven by media talking about terrorists who are Muslims or assumed to be Muslims. | ||
* ''[[antisemitism]]'': Jews are greedy, as proven by somebody's grandfather telling a joke about greedy Jews. | * ''[[antisemitism]]'': Jews are greedy, as proven by somebody's grandfather telling a joke about greedy Jews. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Narrempiry in example texts== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[Mr Garrison's Homophobia]]: Should Garrison's various claims about homosexuals be regarded as true simply on the basis that they fit his homophobic narrative? | ||
Latest revision as of 13:17, 4 November 2015
Narrativism used as empirical evidence: By proving that a certain claim is part of a certain narrative, or at least fits into the narrative, the claim is also considered proven to be valid objective truth. (In Swedish: narrempiri)
Interactions
This facet of categorism is an expression of prejudice and discrimination.
It is likely to intersect with facets such as:
- Narrativism: Provide a story, and show that the claim fits into it.
- Incomprehensibilization: Replacing the need and desire to understand actual people with a need and desire to understand the narrative role these people are given in someone's storytelling.
As well as with abstractions such as:
- Categorization by narrativism: People are identified with the category only as long as they fit the narrative role assigned to it.
Examples of applying this facet to a particular foci of categorism can include:
- antimuslimism: Muslims are terrorists, as proven by media talking about terrorists who are Muslims or assumed to be Muslims.
- antisemitism: Jews are greedy, as proven by somebody's grandfather telling a joke about greedy Jews.
Narrempiry in example texts
- Mr Garrison's Homophobia: Should Garrison's various claims about homosexuals be regarded as true simply on the basis that they fit his homophobic narrative?
