Over the last few weeks we have been discussing dialogue in hard cases, and reviewing the Sternberg taxonomy of hate. Each of the base forms discussed in the last three weeks, Cool Hate, Hot Hate, and Cold Hate, combine with the others to form the remaining entries in the taxonomy. Each is more serious and difficult to address than any of the base forms. The combinations of the base forms that complete the taxonomy are as follows:
- Hot Hate + Cool Hate = Boiling Hate (Revulsion).
- Cool Hate + Cold Hate = Simmering Hate (Loathing).
- Hot Hate + Cold Hate = Seething Hate (Revilement).
- Hot Hate + Cold Hate + Cool Hate = Burning Hate (Desire for Annihilation).
These higher forms of hate are more likely than the base forms to result in violence. More than dialogue is needed to diffuse tensions and to protect others in the community.
Note that it is most effective and less costly to address hate in its base forms than in the combined forms. Each of these more complex forms of hate is supported by the base forms, both individually and in combination. Often, however, early indicators of hate are ignored or even encouraged by others in the community for partisan or other reasons. Ongoing awareness, monitoring, and early intervention by community leaders can prevent the more serious combinations from taking root in a community. The types of facilitated dialogues we discussed in previous posts are one form of intervention that can be effective, particularly when they occur in a context that includes a focus on the meaning, purpose, and future evolution of what is meant by “community”.
Next week we will provide an overview of the “Story of Wisdom” narrative pattern that was briefly mentioned in last week’s post on Cold Hate and whose introduction is in itself a form of intervention when hate is present.