This is very relevant to my recent post on the pretense of judicial impartiality.

My Mazamet

“Social dominance theory was put forth by two researchers, Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto, in 1999. Specifically, Sidanius and Pratto attempted to explain how, and why, social structures seemed to be supported by an unspoken hierarchy of groups based on a number of different traits. These multiple hierarchies may be based on gender, race, age, economic status, and other characteristics – either naturally recurring or obtained.

According to social dominance theory, these hierarchies influence how equitable the allocation of resources is and how the distribution of undesirable work and/or roles are assigned.”

Source: Social Dominance Theory: Definition & Examples

A small (3 page) outline of the theory is available here

From the outline: ” … Moreover, societies
recognize the legal rights of dominants and
portray their ways of living as virtuous and
characteristic of the whole society, whereas
subordinates receive little social recognition
and are even stigmatized. Group dominance

View original post 178 more words

4 thoughts on “Religion as a Tool in Social Dominance Theory

      • SDT is also interesting in that it explains contradictory or shifting positions within the same socio-cultural group. Like being anti-abortion but pro death penalty or panicking about Janet Jackson’s nipple but being okay with someone who says grab ’em by the p-

        Liked by 2 people

        • Bingo! Such moral hypocrisy reveals an uncomfortable truth about our human nature. While we passionately champion the ethical and philosophical principles we believe in, very few of us have the intellectual courage to apply them uniformly and without reservation. What this essentially means is that the vast majority of people are more concerned about perceptions of victory over others (i.e. social dominance) than they are about adhering to their own morality. This hypocrisy, in my view, renders such morality as lacking credibility and as masking one’s own subconscious or conscious hostility.

          Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.