More People Need(ed) to Read Harry Potter

[annoni-no.livejournal.com]

I know, a provocative title in this community, but we have concrete evidence that reading Harry Potter leads to a small, but significant, increase in antipathy toward Donald Trump and his policies.

https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/news/new-study-shows-reading-harry-potter-lowers-americans%E2%80%99-opinions-donald-trump ; (Link through to the actual study in article.)

A while back I posted about a study that found that identifying with Harry Potter led to decreased bias toward stigmatized minorities.  At the time, I wondered how reading the series led people to feel about how to deal with their enemies given the vindictiveness the series shows in a close reading.  As it turns out, the more Harry Potter books someone has read, even controlling for "party identification, gender, education level, age, evangelical self-identification, and social dominance orientation," the more opposed they were to violence and punitive policies (like torturing their enemies as advocated by Trump) and authoritarianism.  This is in addition to confirmation of the decreased bias against outgroups.

You don't have to like Harry Potter, and I completely agree that the books have a lot of problems.  But let's not loose sight of the fact that the world is entering a dangerous, if not outright fascistic period.  There's too much hatred and divisiveness driving our politics; hate crimes have risen by several hundred percent since Trump's election.  If reading Harry Potter does help lead people to greater tolerance and mercy, we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Comments

[zigadenus.livejournal.com]

S'all good. I understand people can get very heated about their ideologies. Sometimes it's fun to watch. Sometimes it's scary though, wondering if you might be next, and then thinking you might have to censor yourself of [respectful] expression of personal opinion in the future. <= confessions of a lurker.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Sometimes it's fun to watch.

I've had so much fun participating in Harry Potter forums the past ten years. I've learnt so much about psychology discussing HP with all types of people. Cognitive dissonance, the Satan Effect (if I'm remembering the name right), confirmation bias, ego, projection, etc, you name it. And all sorts of nuances of debating - good and bad. I can now identify a strawman at twenty paces. :-)

It's quite funny thinking about my little journey. These days the various doctrines of identity politics and SJWs are better known, but I remember coming across the practices for the first time in HP discussions online and scratching my head over them, wondering what in blazes my adversaries were on about. It was my own personal first look at what the universities were churning out. Harry Potter readers/fans, the whole lot of 'em. :-)

[zigadenus.livejournal.com]

what the universities were churning out

As a university educator, I sort of want to disagree with you on principle, but as a university educator, I have to admit: yes, you have a point.

The students I see in the US system -- or at least in the R1 state university I work at -- come into the system woefully unprepared to engage in critical thinking. And between rampant academic misconduct, easy majors, and growing emphasis on students "growth and development experiences" (as opposed to educational outcomes), I sense that many of them probably leave with a degree in hand, and still very little in the way of logic in their heads. Universities are being conducted more and more like businesses, and student satisfaction is weighed heavier all the time -- and students do not rate difficult courses highly, sad to say. Even in the sciences (where I teach), the coursework is substantially easier, and expectations much lower, than the equivalent courses I taught in Canada. But it's not all the fault of the universities viewing students as customers; the other side of it is that research budgets are also a source of university income. As research scientists, we're responsible for funding our own research through grants and every grant is 'taxed' overhead charges by the university (ostensibly to support common infrastructure and keep the lights on). So, the emphasis for scientists is to bring in money, and to get money, you need a vigorous research campaign that churns out publications. It leaves little time for teaching, and in tenure reviews, very little consideration is given to a professor's teaching record. It is too easy for them to shrug, and phone it in when it comes to teaching students the critical thinking skills that they [really] need.