Just like solving a jigsaw puzzle, we appreciate Paul Bloom’s engagement with our research on dehumanization and his valuable insights. In response to his critiques, we want to emphasize that defining dehumanization broadly does not mean including every aspect of it. It’s more like drawing a line between what falls within the scope and what doesn’t. Some of Bloom’s concerns seem to stem from misunderstandings or are actually points our model already addresses, while other criticisms seem to be restating our very own stance. It’s important to untangle these misunderstandings, just as one would unravel a knotted string. By doing so, we can shed light on the nuances of dehumanization and enhance our understanding. Further research and discussion will undoubtedly help us refine and expand upon our theory. Dive into the underlying research to explore the intricacies of dehumanization and join the conversation!
