I was linked to this post after I showed someone my own example of level-5/6 reasoning that came up naturally. I think this example fits entirely within my head, without being ‘externalized’:
A stereotype, say “trans women are predators” is a level-1 belief about a group.
A meta-stereotype, say “cis people believe trans women are predators”, is a level-2 belief about what stereotypes others hold.
A meta-meta-stereotype, say “trans people believe cis people believe trans women are predators”, is a level-3 awareness of what meta-stereotype someone holds. A cis person might hold this belief, and react by acting extra-nice to a trans woman, in hopes of signalling that they are not prejudiced.
A meta-meta-meta-stereotype happens when I (a trans woman) am aware that people might do the previous, and so might discount niceties by strangers.
A meta-meta-meta-meta-stereotype happens when someone is aware that I’ll be discounting their niceties. In this case they may react by trying to ensure they aren’t too over-the-top.
I, of course, have no trouble imagining being such a person—and so am operating at level-6, though in real life I haven’t really been able to observe someone intentionally trying to tone down their niceties to make them feel genuine (but it’s surely happened). I know I’ve naturally thought “If I were such a person, interacting with me, I’d maybe start off with an extra-nice signal, but from then on act naturally and genuinely”.
Internally, it feels like what is actually being thought is:
“I don’t want them to think I’m prejudiced, so I’ll make sure to be clearly nice” (effectively level-2, as ‘prejudiced’ is treated like an attribute like ‘tall’)
“They’re just trying to look unprejudiced, I can’t trust their niceties to be genuine” (effectively level-3)
“I don’t want them to think I’m just trying to look unprejudiced, so I shouldn’t be too over-the-top” (effectively level-4)
I was linked to this post after I showed someone my own example of level-5/6 reasoning that came up naturally. I think this example fits entirely within my head, without being ‘externalized’:
A stereotype, say “trans women are predators” is a level-1 belief about a group.
A meta-stereotype, say “cis people believe trans women are predators”, is a level-2 belief about what stereotypes others hold.
A meta-meta-stereotype, say “trans people believe cis people believe trans women are predators”, is a level-3 awareness of what meta-stereotype someone holds. A cis person might hold this belief, and react by acting extra-nice to a trans woman, in hopes of signalling that they are not prejudiced.
A meta-meta-meta-stereotype happens when I (a trans woman) am aware that people might do the previous, and so might discount niceties by strangers.
A meta-meta-meta-meta-stereotype happens when someone is aware that I’ll be discounting their niceties. In this case they may react by trying to ensure they aren’t too over-the-top.
I, of course, have no trouble imagining being such a person—and so am operating at level-6, though in real life I haven’t really been able to observe someone intentionally trying to tone down their niceties to make them feel genuine (but it’s surely happened). I know I’ve naturally thought “If I were such a person, interacting with me, I’d maybe start off with an extra-nice signal, but from then on act naturally and genuinely”.
Internally, it feels like what is actually being thought is:
“I don’t want them to think I’m prejudiced, so I’ll make sure to be clearly nice” (effectively level-2, as ‘prejudiced’ is treated like an attribute like ‘tall’)
“They’re just trying to look unprejudiced, I can’t trust their niceties to be genuine” (effectively level-3)
“I don’t want them to think I’m just trying to look unprejudiced, so I shouldn’t be too over-the-top” (effectively level-4)