Contempt is an emotion and a disposition. Contempt destroys relationships.
Contempt
is an emotion associated with feeling morally superior to another person.
Contempt may be accompanied by mild anger. The people expressing contempt
appears to see themselves as more powerful and of a higher status than the
target of contempt.
Contempt
may be upward and downward. That is, a person of lower social rank may feel
upward contempt toward social superiors like authority figures or work supervisors. And people of
higher social rank may feel downward contempt toward those viewed as of lower
social rank like a professor toward a person of limited education or an experienced clinician toward a novice.
The work
of Paul Ekman identified a facial expression of contempt as the corner of one
side of a lip raised—a unilateral facial expression. The voice tone of contempt
is perceived as smug and disapproving.
Contempt
can have posture too—a move toward being physically upright as if to “look down
one’s nose.” Eye-rolling is another sign of contempt.
As a psychotherapist, the work of John Gottman and his colleagues (e.g., Gottman & Silver, 1999) had a powerful effect on my appreciation for contempt, which is an emotion-driven attitude that can destroy a marriage.
Gottman and
Silver illustrate contempt in a couple’s relationship. One partner routinely
criticizes the other. The second person responds with a sneer and sarcasm when the critic
makes a suggestion. The sarcasm turns to cynicism—both words reveal contempt.
The authors add other indicators of contempt: “name-calling, eye-rolling, mockery, and hostile
humor (Kindle location 1254).”
Contempt is related to disgust psychology but it is not the same. In both cases, a social distance occurs but disgust may be linked to feeling revulsion about something considered unclean, yucky, or sickening whereas, people feeling contempt may feel good.
Contempt in
a relationship conveys disgust and leads to more conflict, which prevents
reconciliation. Contempt develops from a long history of negative thoughts toward
the other in a relationship and can lead to a closely related pattern of belligerence,
which is an expression of anger in an aggressive manner. Belligerence is
manifest as a threat or provocation. In common language, contempt is the poison
in toxic relationships.
In their
article about dispositional contempt, Roberta Shriber at UC-Davis and her
colleagues refer to the concept as “the tendency to look down on, distance, and
derogate others who violate our standards (2017, p. 280).” These authors want
to move the study of contempt from a look at the emotional components of which
disgust is paramount, to a personality trait. Features of the disposition include
a pattern of viewing select others as incompetent, inferior, and to be avoided.
Shriber and others build on the data for contempt as a disposition based on its
durability in the work of John Gottman and his colleagues.
In Christianity, the Apostle Paul warned people in the Roman church against a contemptuous attitude toward people who held different convictions (See chapter 14).
In philosophy, contempt may be discussed as an example of a judgmental emotion. See the entry "emotion" in the SEP.
For a
measure of contempt, see the Dispositional Contempt Scale
Read more about the problem of contempt in relationships: Principles of Healthy Marriages
Resources
The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work by Gottman & Silver
Unmasking the Face by Ekman & Friesen
The Righteous Mind by Haidt
Topics: #contempt #disgust #moralpsychology #righteousmind
Checkout My Page www.suttong.com
My Books AMAZON and GOOGLE STORE
FOLLOW me on FACEBOOK Geoff
W. Sutton TWITTER @Geoff.W.Sutton
PINTEREST www.pinterest.com/GeoffWSutton
Articles: Academia Geoff
W Sutton ResearchGate
Geoffrey W Sutton
References
Gottman, J.
& Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. New
York: Three Rivers.
Schriber,
R. A., Chung, J. M., Sorensen, K. S., & Robins, R. W. (2017). Dispositional
contempt: A first look at the contemptuous person. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 280-309.
No comments:
Post a Comment