{"id":3786,"date":"1952-01-01T01:00:00","date_gmt":"1952-01-01T01:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/"},"modified":"2022-11-28T13:47:50","modified_gmt":"2022-11-28T13:47:50","slug":"january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices","status":"publish","type":"rbc_letter","link":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","title":{"rendered":"January 1952 &#8211; Vol. 33, No. 1 &#8211; Our Prejudices"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"layout-column-main\">\n<p class=\"boldtext\">Prejudice is our number one problem in human                     relations.<\/p>\n<p> It is prejudice that closes our minds to the truth and knowledge                     which would enable us to work together in friendship, vote                     with intelligence, worship in understanding, and avoid international                     disputes.<\/p>\n<p>In one of Aesop&#8217;s <em>Fables <\/em>he tells how Jupiter,                     in a mischievous mood, made mankind a present of spectacles.                     Every man had a pair, but they did not represent objects to                     all mankind alike. One pair was purple, another blue; one                     white and another black; some were red, green and yellow.                     &#8220;However, notwithstanding this diversity, says Aesop, every                     man was charmed with his own, believing it the best, and enjoyed                     in opinion all the satisfactions of truth.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Many civilizations in the world at different times and places                     have had widely different patterns of behaviour. Almost anything                     in social and personal life which we now deplore was somewhere                     and at some time acceptable. Out of those practices, which                     were right and proper in their age, have come today&#8217;s cultures.                     A respect for these traditions of others will lead to understanding                     and avoid prejudice.<\/p>\n<p>All of us are entitled to our own petty prejudices. Most                     of us have been biased against books we were told we should                     read, though later we liked them. Many business men are prejudiced                     against people who sign letters &#8220;dictated but not read.&#8221; Elevator                     operators are prejudiced against people who press elevator                     buttons needlessly; we all are prejudiced against people who                     stride imperiously through revolving doors.<\/p>\n<h3>Everyone Makes Mistakes<\/h3>\n<p>That is not the kind of prejudice this letter is about.                     The hurtful prejudices are the mental fixations of the 100-per-centers,                     people who won&#8217;t admit you have a side to your case, and demand                     that you either agree wholly with their opinions, or disagree.<\/p>\n<p>It may be true that the more ignorant a man is, the more                     positive he is in his opinions, and the more belligerently                     inclined to look upon your doubt of his statements as a sin                     against him.<\/p>\n<p>Intelligently alive people have no such delusions. They                     know that absolute certainty is regarded by scientists as                     an impossibility, and scientists, of all people, have the                     opportunity to check and re-check their findings.<\/p>\n<p>Mistakes occur in the thought of all living people. In the                     Provincial Museum in Toronto there is a wizened caveman who                     hasn&#8217;t made a mistake for several thousand years, ever since                     he curled up in his grass mat and went to sleep. The only                     people who are never mistaken are dead.<\/p>\n<p>We do ourselves an injury by killing part of our minds when                     we reject contradiction, refuse to hear the other side of                     a story, or oppose opinions without learning the facts. We                     may be persons who think that new truths may have been desirable                     once, but that we have had enough of them now; we may be addicted                     to attending committee meetings devoted to keeping things                     as they are; or we may be, as Stefan Zweig said of a famous                     clergyman: fundamentally honest and straightforward, but wearing                     blinkers; one of those persons for whom only their own truth                     is true, only their own virtue virtuous, only their own Christianity                     Christian.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h3>The Closed Mind<\/h3>\n<p>The difficulty is that you cannot prove to really prejudiced                     people that their beliefs are not true. Most of the time they                     register triumph over your argument by pointing to some particular                     case where their beliefs have been successful. They seem unable                     to grasp principles and laws. They are like those who laughed                     at Socrates when he tried to teach men a new way of reasoning                     fearlessly, compelled him to drink the hemlock, and in that                     one cup drowned a whole civilization.<\/p>\n<p>Many such people go through a process they call &#8220;making                     up their minds&#8221; and then close their minds with a one-way                     zipper. That process will be avoided by persons seeking or                     building a happy philosophy.<\/p>\n<p>They will ward off dogmatism, smugness, bias, and close-mindedness.                     They realize that the fullness of living can be attained only                     by understanding.<\/p>\n<p>There are many different causes of closed minds. As children                     we were all tolerant. We played with the neighbours&#8217; children                     without a thought of race or creed or class. But the democracy                     of childhood was broken down by the artificial standards of                     the grown-ups.<\/p>\n<p>Boys going home from high school on a commuter train out                     of Montreal typified this. There were at least three racial                     strains in the party, but they talked and laughed together                     in a friendly open way. Their frank countenances showed their                     belief in a good and neighbourly world. These teen-agers                     have not yet been touched by the hand of prejudice.<\/p>\n<p>By-and-by they will realize that discrimination                     exists in their families, in their schools and in almost every                     sector of their lives. Many of them will conform to the discriminatory                     patterns of their groups, not because they are prejudiced                     but because it is easier to discriminate than to resist the                     group&#8217;s demand for conformity.<\/p>\n<p>Sad to say, the opinion which they are compelled to accept                     may be based on hearsay or tradition: what Voltaire called                     &#8220;The reason of fools.&#8221; Long before Voltaire&#8217;s time, a philosopher                     of the Cynic school said that the most necessary branch of                     knowledge is to unlearn prejudices.<\/p>\n<h3>What Causes Prejudice?<\/h3>\n<p>Many of our prejudices are due to unquestioning acceptance                     of the beliefs commonly held by members of our group; others                     may be traced to the way in which we make snap judgments;                     still others can be blamed on our wishful thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Envy is the cause of much prejudiced thinking. The man who                     cannot mend his own case is tempted to do what he can to impair                     another&#8217;s. In fact, some who would go to great and good lengths                     to help someone who fell on evil days will become annoyed                     if that same person should have good fortune.<\/p>\n<p>Prejudice is a personal thing. Even if the conduct of others                     has roused our emotion- envy, anger or fear &#8211; it is really                     we ourselves who create the prejudice by the way in which                     we think about the objectionable conduct.<\/p>\n<p>Our opinions should not be blamed upon others. We ourselves                     can so manage our opinions as to save us from worry and prejudice                     and a host of other thoughts that are bad for us. It is quite                     true to say that our prejudices do not hurt others as much                     as they hurt ourselves, physically, mentally and spiritually.<\/p>\n<p>It is easy for us to be tolerant of others&#8217; opinions when                     we like them, but we must build up a certain philosophy if                     we are to stand what we don&#8217;t like. Tolerance distinguishes                     what is essential, and lets the unessential go. It admits                     that firm convictions are splendid when they relate to important                     matters, but they are a public nuisance when they provoke                     a row over petty things.<\/p>\n<h3>The Open Mind<\/h3>\n<p>It is not necessary to have an opinion on every matter.                     All that we know is still infinitely less than all that still                     remains unknown. A scientist may search for days and years,                     and return without a single opinion. His habit of life and                     thought demands that he shall believe nothing without evidence.                     Like him, we shall profit if we learn to be painstaking in                     the discovery of truth, and to identify it before expressing                     opinions. That is much more exciting and rewarding than trying                     to prove something.<\/p>\n<p>When we approach the choices and judgments of life with                     open minds we are likely to find that nothing is altogether                     good or true, and nothing is altogether bad or false. What                     may appear to the casual person as a stain on someone&#8217;s character                     will perhaps reveal itself to you as a scar from a hard-won                     field.<\/p>\n<p>The opinions of three eminent men, widely separated in time                     and in qualities, may be brought together on this point. Socrates,                     the Greek philosopher of the fourth century B.C., said: &#8220;I                     am extremely desirous to be persuaded by you, but not against                     my own better judgment.&#8221; Thomas Carlyle, the Scottish essayist,                     said: &#8220;It is useful, nay essential, to see his good qualities                     before pronouncing on his bad.&#8221; And Thomas Edison, the inventor,                     said: &#8220;I haven&#8217;t any conclusions to give; I am just learning                     about things myself.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h3>Human Relations<\/h3>\n<p>Human relations are the result of a complicated interplay                     of thought and emotion. The result may be understanding, not                     understanding, or misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>Our attitudes toward particular people may be affected by                     our attitude toward people in general, but there are exceptions.                     One may be sincerely fond of a particular-member of another                     race or creed, and still possess race or religious prejudice.                     A man may be in love with a particular woman, elevate her                     on a pedestal, and sincerely feel inferior to her: but at                     the same time, if he is an employer, he may refuse to hire                     women.<\/p>\n<p>If we see a person whom we believe we know very well acting                     in a manner which doesn&#8217;t meet our expectations, we may be                     shocked or we may try to save our own false conception by                     declaring something is wrong with him. It all too infrequently                     occurs to us that something might be wrong with our own assumptions                     and interpretations; that we might have a trace of prejudice                     in us.<\/p>\n<p>Misunderstanding is particularly likely if there is hesitancy                     to communicate thoughts and feelings, or a barrier of some                     other sort, between us. Business people are up against this                     problem continually, because it is the nature of business                     to require co-operation among those engaged in the same                     sort of work. We cannot escape the dilemma by the simple technique                     of avoiding problems.<\/p>\n<p>People who are inclined toward introversion find it difficult                     to understand those who are inclined toward extroversion.                     They are moved by different impulses and by different ways                     of looking at life. The thing to do is to realize that people                     are different in their personality structure. It is the fate                     of men to see the world differently, and to develop different                     meanings and values of life. Insight into this fact will go                     far toward avoiding prejudice.<\/p>\n<p>Once again, as has been said so often in these Letters,                     emphasizing the positive has its virtues. When we look for                     the good we are likely to appreciate a man&#8217;s excellencies                     and find that they far outweigh his faults.<\/p>\n<h3>Communicating Ideas<\/h3>\n<p>In all our human affairs the communication of ideas is of                     utmost importance. We can be sadly misled in our judgments                     if we neglect the fact that two things may be called by the                     same name and yet not be the same.<\/p>\n<p>Things in nature are not either this or that. Nature is                     filled with gradations: from hot weather to cold, from a stormy                     sea to a calm, from a minute organism to great animals. When                     we apply this test to things that are happening around us                     every day we find that there is usually a smooth series from                     extreme to extreme.<\/p>\n<p>Kenneth S. Keyes gives a few hints for avoiding this pitfall                     in his book <em>How to Develop Your Thinking Ability<\/em>.                     &#8220;We must have patience with those who would push us toward                     an extreme position,&#8221; he writes. &#8220;If we fall into their trap&#8230;they                     will have no trouble making us appear foolish.&#8221; Mr. Keyes                     then goes on to suggest that we make more use of the word                     &#8220;many&#8221; instead of &#8220;all&#8221;; &#8220;usually&#8221; instead of &#8220;always&#8221;; &#8220;seldom&#8221;                     instead of &#8220;never&#8221;; and &#8220;similar&#8221; instead of &#8220;same&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>He also advocates use of protective phrases such as: &#8220;from                     my point of view; as I see it; apparently; up to a point;                     it is possible that.&#8221; Look at the futile arguments that could                     be avoided if we used the words &#8220;to me&#8221; consistently!<\/p>\n<p>Another help toward avoiding prejudice would be to define                     words and notions. &#8220;Let&#8217;s define our terms&#8221; is not an idle                     phrase, but a necessary tool for use when two persons converse                     on some serious topic.<\/p>\n<h3>Need for Philosophy<\/h3>\n<p>Prejudices cannot be entirely eliminated (not, at any rate,                     in the present stage of human development) but their destructive                     influence and their pathological result can be reduced by                     the acquiring of wisdom. Without wisdom, the intellect remains                     the slave of prejudice and superstition.<\/p>\n<p>None of us knows enough. We can keep on, with profit, hearing                     what can be said about a subject by persons of every variety                     of opinion, and by studying all the ways in which it can be                     looked at by every character of mind.<\/p>\n<p>How far removed that is from arriving at choices and judgments                     on the basis of sheer guesses, superstitions, and folkway                     habits of thought. Just think of the futility of guessing:                     if a million people should guess how far it is from the earth                     to the moon, they would know no more than they did before,                     and if one of them should accidentally hit on the correct                     distance (average 238,857 miles) he would not know it.<\/p>\n<p>Neither scientist nor philosopher will judge by guesswork                     or intuition or tradition: he will attempt to find the facts.<\/p>\n<p>A. E. Wiggam tells in his book <em>The Marks of an Educated                     Man <\/em>about a friend who was much given to acting on impulsive                     thought. Realizing his handicap, he adopted the plan of writing                     his idea on a piece of paper, laying it on his desk, and assuming                     that it was on the witness stand. He would subject it to a                     merciless cross-examination. Only if it got through this                     &#8220;third degree&#8221; did he call his idea a good one, and put it                     into practical use. Formerly a &#8220;dreamer&#8221;, he developed into                     a very strong executive.<\/p>\n<p>It is a big advantage to see things, from the smallest to                     the greatest, through other people s eyes. In reading an essay                     or a business contract, your eyes may follow the writer&#8217;s                     steps, but to know what the writer saw you need his eyes.                     You need to think of the circumstances that surrounded him                     and the ambitions that moved him; what his desires were and                     the method he took to acquaint you with them.<\/p>\n<p>Because we cannot, in many cases, see the picture whole                     in this way, why don&#8217;t we say that so-and-so behaved                     in a certain situation, at a certain time, in a certain way,                     instead of saying positively that he is such-and-such?                     That approach would save us both heartaches and headaches.<\/p>\n<h3>Black and White<\/h3>\n<p>Nothing, we are told by scientists, is pure black or pure                     white. We need to accustom ourselves to thinking in degrees                     of black and white, goodness and badness, poisonous and wholesome.<\/p>\n<p>Keyes tells, in his book previously referred to, about a                     chemical called phenyl-thio-carbimide, the &#8220;tolerance                     chemical.&#8221; One out of five persons finds it tasteless, 65                     per cent find it bitter, 5 per cent call it sour, 2 per cent                     insist that it is sweet, and 5 per cent are sure it is salty.                     Others call it something else. There is no one answer on which                     people can agree. Knowing this, we realize the futility of                     argument about the taste of the chemical, and we shall not                     be prejudiced against friends whose opinions differ from ours.<\/p>\n<p>Our thinking habits are quite often incompetent to wrestle                     with a world in which no two things are identical. There are                     similarities, it is true, but they do not justify our overlooking                     the differences. Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: &#8220;Nature never                     rhymes her children nor makes two men alike.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, no idea or thought comes to our minds singly.                     Every one comes preceded by many others, attended by many,                     followed by many. And we ourselves differ from other people                     in mentality, training, heredity, environment and objective.                     Surely, in face of all these hazards of thought, threatening                     us always with the penalty that follows foolish word and action,                     we need to consider our ideas from all sides &#8211; and perhaps                     with a slight inclination toward a different conclusion than                     the one we ardently desire.<\/p>\n<h3>The Middle Path<\/h3>\n<p>We shall find, perhaps in the majority of cases, that there                     is a middle path where both we and those who have different                     convictions may walk comfortably together. This middle path                     is not a compromise; it stands for the emancipation of the                     mind, as well as for personal freedom and well-being.<\/p>\n<p>How do we get on to this middle path? Some hints have already                     been drawn from ancient and modern writers, but chief among                     them is to enquire into the truth, respect others&#8217; opinions,                     and watch our thinking so as to guard against &#8220;either &#8211; or&#8221;                     words, &#8220;black or white&#8221; thoughts and &#8220;all or none&#8221; attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>In the quaint idiom of a Stoic philosopher: &#8220;Doth a man                     bathe himself quickly? Then say not &#8216;wrongly&#8217; but &#8216;quickly&#8217;.                     Doth he drink much wine? Then say not &#8216;wrongly&#8217; but &#8216;much&#8217;.                     For whence do you know if it were ill done till you have understood                     his opinion?&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Above all, perhaps, is the necessity to know one another.                     Congenial people exist on both sides of every antagonistic                     boundary. Heart calls to heart and mind to mind the world                     over. But not unless we know one another.<\/p>\n<h3>On Changing Your Mind<\/h3>\n<p>It seems somehow criminal to some people to change their                     minds. There is nothing wrong with telling people one thing                     today and something else tomorrow: we change, and the world                     changes. Many things which were true yesterday are not so                     today.<\/p>\n<p>It is a sign of our vitality to own that we have changed                     our opinion, indicating that we are wiser than we were. He                     is, indeed, a wise man who keeps his mind open so that he                     recognizes important changes.<\/p>\n<p>People with closed minds are prejudiced in favour of yesterday&#8217;s                     thoughts. They resent having to question and re-examine                     their attitudes and ideas; still more do they resent it when                     others raise questions. Emerson dismissed such people in this                     way: &#8220;A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds,                     adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h3>Seeking Truth<\/h3>\n<p>The philosophic person recognizes that if a thing is true                     you must accept it no matter how incredible or unpalatable                     it may be. No real values are destroyed or impaired by learning                     the truth about them. The falsities and prejudices of the                     world are allergic to truth and will die if sufficiently exposed                     to it.<\/p>\n<p>In Sir Henry Rider Haggard&#8217;s fantastic story <em>She<\/em>,                     truth was represented in the temple of Kor by a statue of                     a woman, leaning forward with poised wings. Her arms were                     outstretched like those of some woman about to embrace one                     she dearly loved. Her whole attitude was tenderly beseeching.                     Her face was thinly veiled. The inscription read: &#8220;Is there                     no man that will draw my veil and look upon my face, for it                     is very fair?&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>And Sir Richard Livingstone, great scholar, set a high and                     shining prospect of truth in outlining the tasks of education                     in today&#8217;s world: truth is&#8221;&nbsp;&#8230;that veracity which does                     its best to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but                     the truth; where it is uncertain, confesses to uncertainty;                     where it lacks knowledge, does not pretend to it; which is                     candid and frank, takes no unfair advantage in argument, is                     careful not to misrepresent an opponent or to ignore the strength                     of his case and the weakness of its own.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>When a man makes this surrender to truth, he is for the                     first time in his life free &#8211; free from superstition, free                     from prejudice and free from dogmatism. He finds himself with                     a strange new power, the power to discover, handle and control                     facts. He can claim to be an educated man. He is ready to                     polish his mind against the minds of others in a poised way.<\/p>\n<h3>Discretion is Needed<\/h3>\n<p>We do not know all the answers to the questions about human                     life and destiny&#8230;we do realize that there is still very                     far to go and very much to learn.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are trying hard to think in the right way and                     to eliminate prejudice from their lives are likely to be impatient                     with those who lag behind them.<\/p>\n<p>Being tolerant means that we should not expect too much                     of other people. Our viewpoint will not always appear reasonable                     to others, and we will save ourselves many disappointments                     if we do not demand that others see things from our point                     of view.<\/p>\n<p>Discretion in our thinking will lead us to discretion in                     our contacts with people. An Eastern legend says: &#8220;In making                     genius, the fairies left out one essential gift, the knowledge                     of when to stop.&#8221; So, while we adopt the tolerant way of life                     for our own sake, we stand in danger of losing all we might                     gain if we insist too strongly upon having others conform                     to it.<\/p>\n<h3>Understanding<\/h3>\n<p>There are few gifts that one person can give to another                     as rich as understanding. Understanding is a disposition to                     recognize sympathetically the beliefs of others without necessarily                     embracing them.<\/p>\n<p>But armchair philosophy is not what the world needs. The                     valuable thing is not to know what virtue is, but to do it.                     It is not necessary to know what bravery means, but to be                     brave; nor to give a dictionary meaning of tolerance, but                     to be tolerant. And if we are going to be tolerant, we might                     as well go the other step: tolerance is better than intolerance,                     but charity is better still.<\/p>\n<p>This is all simple, practical, possible for everyone: and                     attractive, too. Removal of prejudice and the cultivation                     of tolerance mean much in deciding the fate of humanity and                     the happiness of individuals. They can bring beauty into our                     living.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":79,"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[1],"rbc_letter_theme":[],"rbc_letter_year":[32],"class_list":["post-3786","rbc_letter","type-rbc_letter","status-publish","hentry","category-uncategorized","rbc_letter_year-32"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.2 (Yoast SEO v27.2) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Prejudice is our number one problem in human relations. It is prejudice that closes our minds to the truth and knowledge which would enable us to work together in friendship, vote with intelligence, worship in understanding, and avoid international disputes. In one of Aesop&#8217;s Fables he tells how Jupiter, in a mischievous mood, made mankind [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"RBC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-11-28T13:47:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/\",\"name\":\"January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1952-01-01T01:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-11-28T13:47:50+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/\",\"name\":\"RBC\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC","og_description":"Prejudice is our number one problem in human relations. It is prejudice that closes our minds to the truth and knowledge which would enable us to work together in friendship, vote with intelligence, worship in understanding, and avoid international disputes. In one of Aesop&#8217;s Fables he tells how Jupiter, in a mischievous mood, made mankind [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","og_site_name":"RBC","article_modified_time":"2022-11-28T13:47:50+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","name":"January 1952 - Vol. 33, No. 1 - Our Prejudices - RBC","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"1952-01-01T01:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2022-11-28T13:47:50+00:00","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/","name":"RBC","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"parsely":{"version":"1.1.0","canonical_url":"https:\/\/rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","smart_links":{"inbound":0,"outbound":0},"traffic_boost_suggestions_count":0,"meta":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","headline":"January 1952 &#8211; Vol. 33, No. 1 &#8211; Our Prejudices","url":"http:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/about-us\/history\/letter\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\/"},"thumbnailUrl":"","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":""},"articleSection":"Uncategorized","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"amandeepsingh"}],"creator":["amandeepsingh"],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"RBC","logo":""},"keywords":[],"dateCreated":"1952-01-01T01:00:00Z","datePublished":"1952-01-01T01:00:00Z","dateModified":"2022-11-28T13:47:50Z"},"rendered":"<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"wp-parsely-metadata\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"headline\":\"January 1952 &#8211; Vol. 33, No. 1 &#8211; Our Prejudices\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/www.rbc.com\\\/en\\\/about-us\\\/history\\\/letter\\\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\\\/\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\\\/\\\/www.rbc.com\\\/en\\\/about-us\\\/history\\\/letter\\\/january-1952-vol-33-no-1-our-prejudices\\\/\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"url\":\"\"},\"articleSection\":\"Uncategorized\",\"author\":[{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"amandeepsingh\"}],\"creator\":[\"amandeepsingh\"],\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"name\":\"RBC\",\"logo\":\"\"},\"keywords\":[],\"dateCreated\":\"1952-01-01T01:00:00Z\",\"datePublished\":\"1952-01-01T01:00:00Z\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-11-28T13:47:50Z\"}<\/script>","tracker_url":"https:\/\/cdn.parsely.com\/keys\/rbc.com\/p.js"},"featured_img":false,"coauthors":[],"author_meta":{"author_link":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/author\/amandeepsingh\/","display_name":"amandeepsingh"},"relative_dates":{"created":"Posted 74 years ago","modified":"Updated 3 years ago"},"absolute_dates":{"created":"Posted on January 1, 1952","modified":"Updated on November 28, 2022"},"absolute_dates_time":{"created":"Posted on January 1, 1952 1:00 am","modified":"Updated on November 28, 2022 1:47 pm"},"featured_img_caption":"","tax_additional":{"category":{"linked":["<a href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/category\/uncategorized\/\" class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">Uncategorized<\/a>"],"unlinked":["<span class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">Uncategorized<\/span>"],"slug":"category","name":"Categories"},"rbc_letter_theme":{"linked":[],"unlinked":[],"slug":"rbc_letter_theme","name":"Themes"},"rbc_letter_year":{"linked":["<a href=\"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/year\/1952\/\" class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">1952<\/a>"],"unlinked":["<span class=\"advgb-post-tax-term\">1952<\/span>"],"slug":"rbc_letter_year","name":"Years"}},"series_order":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter\/3786","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/rbc_letter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/79"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter\/3786\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3786"},{"taxonomy":"rbc_letter_theme","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter_theme?post=3786"},{"taxonomy":"rbc_letter_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rbc.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rbc_letter_year?post=3786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}