Denying shared humanity creates non-relation rather than strangeness within a group

Evidence

The relation of the Greeks to the barbarians is a typical example; so are all the cases in which the general characteristics one takes as peculiarly and merely human are disallowed to the other. But here the expression “the stranger” no longer has any positive meaning. The relation with him is a non-relation; he is not what we have been discussing here: the stranger as a member of the group itself. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 400

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes the stranger-as-group-member from the non-relation of those excluded from shared humanity, sharpening the boundary of Simmel’s concept.
• XREF: connects to: Internal uniformity and exclusivity of a group block universal humanity ties — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 604; Successful dehumanizing creates moral exclusion, placing targeted groups outside the scope of moral protection — Dehumanizing Always Starts With Language; Living surrounded by strangers is a peculiar condition requiring explanation (+12 more)

Related

• Some strangeness denies the stranger even general human commonality, making the relation a non-relation (similarity 0.85)
• Internal uniformity and exclusivity of a group block universal humanity ties (similarity 0.83)
• The stranger is simultaneously outside and inside the group’s structure (similarity 0.80)
• Treating all humanity as one’s in-group improves intergroup relations (similarity 0.78)
• Shared universal traits make the stranger simultaneously near and far (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Internal uniformity and exclusivity of a group block universal humanity ties #expands (0.60) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 604