EZ Reflections
Posts
Judging What We Do Not Know

Judging What We Do Not Know

Furkhan Dandia
December 02, 2025

In partnership with

Judging What We Do Not Know

In last week's episode of EZ Conversations, I had a conversation with Matthew Dickson (Listen Here), where we discussed Matthew's journey with schizophrenia. As Matthew explains in the episode, he began experiencing symptoms in university. While he was able to graduate with an engineering degree, his symptoms worsened afterward — but fortunately, he received a diagnosis and treatment through medication. Matthew shared how the medication not only helped him overcome his symptoms but also helped him build resilience. He has since bicycled across Canada twice, earning a distinction for doing so while navigating a condition that is so often misunderstood. Now that Matthew has found stability, he dedicates his life to advocating for mental health support in developing countries, pouring significant time and energy into initiatives that uplift some of the most underserved populations.

Throughout the episode, Matthew also makes a powerful call to action: to stop judging people based solely on the schizophrenia label. He highlights how common misconceptions — such as the idea that schizophrenia is inherently linked to violence — create barriers to understanding, care, and social integration. We unpacked many of these myths in our conversation, guided by the hope that listeners walk away with more knowledge and far less fear.

As I reflected on this conversation with Matthew, including his call to action, I noticed a subtle discomfort arising within myself during my trip to Saudi Arabia. Being surrounded by people from all corners of the world, I found myself observing my own snap judgments. I judged people for not following certain etiquette I unconsciously assumed were universal — not standing close in line, jumping ahead when someone was on their phone, or moving differently in crowded spaces.

What surfaced within me was interesting: these judgments were not moral convictions; they were reactions to something unfamiliar. They were rooted not in truth but in interpretation — interpretations shaped by my cultural conditioning, my expectations, and my assumptions about what “normal” behaviour looks like.

Then another thought hit me: perhaps I was the one signalling something different. If I was staring at my phone while in line, maybe I appeared undecided or still browsing, which communicated to others that they could move ahead. What I saw as “line cutting” may have simply been someone responding to a signal I didn’t know I was giving.

This small travel experience became a living example of what social psychologists call out-group dynamics — the tendency to judge behaviours that fall outside our own cultural, social, or perceptual norms. And this pattern doesn’t only shape how we see strangers in line; it shapes how societies treat people with mental illness, different cultural backgrounds, or unfamiliar identities.

The Psychology of Out-Group Bias — And Why It Blocks Empathy

Research across social psychology, neuroscience, and evolutionary psychology shows that humans are wired to form in-groups (people we see as “us”) and out-groups (“them”). This isn’t inherently malicious — it’s rooted in cognitive efficiency — but it carries consequences.

1. Out-Group Bias Reduces Empathy

Studies using fMRI show that people exhibit reduced neural empathic responses when witnessing pain or discomfort in out-group members compared to in-group members.

A landmark study by Xu et al. (2009) demonstrated that the brain’s pain-empathy circuits were less active when people observed discomfort in individuals from different racial groups.
Cikara, Bruneau, & Saxe (2011) found that strong in-group identification actually predicts lower empathy toward out-groups and, in some cases, even schadenfreude (pleasure at another’s misfortune).

This doesn’t mean we are incapable of empathy — but rather that empathy is not automatically extended equally. It requires awareness and intentional effort.

2. Labels Trigger Dehumanization

When someone carries a mental health label like “schizophrenia,” research shows that people subconsciously associate it with unpredictability or danger.

Studies by Haslam (2006) and subsequent research show that mental illness labels can lead to dehumanization — perceiving someone as less capable, less rational, or less trustworthy.
Angermeyer & Dietrich (2006) found that schizophrenia is one of the most stigmatized mental illnesses globally, largely due to misconceptions perpetuated by the media.

This dehumanization weakens compassion. It creates emotional distance. It makes it harder to see the full humanity of the person behind the diagnosis.

3. The “Out-Group Homogeneity Effect.”

Out-group members are viewed as “all the same,” while in-group members are seen as individuals.

Research by Quattrone & Jones (1980) identified this phenomenon, showing that people perceive far less diversity among out-group members.

This explains why a single negative story about someone with schizophrenia can unfairly color opinions about the entire group.

4. Threat Narratives Amplify Fear

Humans are highly sensitive to threat. When a label (e.g., “schizophrenia”) becomes associated with danger — even inaccurately — it activates the amygdala and stress circuits associated with self-protection.

Studies by Phelan & Link (1998) show that the more dangerous people perceive mental illness to be, the more they support social distance and segregation.

This directly contradicts the reality: people with schizophrenia are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

What This Means for Us — And for Compassion

When we judge what we do not understand, we build walls between ourselves and others. Out-group biases are subtle, automatic, and often invisible unless we intentionally examine them. But as Matthew pointed out, and as my own reflections revealed, these judgments prevent us from truly seeing one another. They limit our capacity for compassion — the very thing that holds communities, families, and humanity together.

To experience empathy, we must be willing to:

Slow down our assumptions
Interrupt automatic judgments
Become curious about the unfamiliar
Recognize that behaviour is often a reflection of context, not character
Understand the individual, not the label

Compassion begins where assumption ends.

The more we make room for what we do not know, the more we allow ourselves to connect — across cultures, across diagnoses, across differences. And perhaps that is the antidote in a world where separation continues to grow.

A snippet of the Episode

Head to YouTube for the full episode. Or Subscribe below:

What people are saying about the podcast:

Quote of the Week:

“Judging others is easy because it distracts us from the responsibility of judging ourselves.”

Charles Glassman

Looking to build your own Newsletter?

Follow my personalized link to get 20% off all Beehiiv plans:

beehiiv — The newsletter platform built for growth

Access the best tools available in email, helping your newsletter scale and monetize like never before.

www.beehiiv.com?via=EZ

Reply

or to participate.

Judging What We Do Not Know

Judging What We Do Not Know