Categories Creates Division

How Categorization Fuels Division in Our Modern World?

Throughout history, humans have exhibited a remarkable ability to divide themselves into groups, categories, and factions. From the moment we are old enough to process the idea of “us” versus “them,” the tendency to draw lines becomes ingrained. We see it in our daily social interactions, in institutions, online communities, and across the entire spectrum of human life. Such divisions are based on various forms of categorization: race, religion, sexuality, politics, class, gender, occupation, and even relatively trivial things such as the sports teams we support or the music we listen to. These differences, which often start out as mere descriptors, can morph into boundaries that segregate and provoke hostility.

Today, our world seems more divided than ever, and many people point to technology, politics, or globalization as the primary culprits. However, at the root of these problems is something more subtle and primordial: categorization. By dividing each other into labels—whether related to wealth, ethnicity, ability, sexual orientation, lifestyle, or personal interests—we create “in-groups” and “out-groups.” It is within this dynamic that mistrust, envy, fear, and hatred can flourish.

In modern societies, categorization can take on an endless number of forms: sexuality (gay, straight, bisexual, asexual, pansexual), race (Black, White, Asian, Hispanic), height (“short kings” vs. the tall), disabilities (visible and invisible), intelligence (gifted, average, challenged), and so on. Even the way people earn money—whether they are influencers, sex workers, or OnlyFans creators—becomes yet another label. The more we label, the more we draw lines and create potential conflict. Historically, the notion of “us vs. them” has been central to human survival mechanisms, but in an age of unprecedented global interconnectivity, it may have transformed into a destructive force.

This article dives into the myriad ways in which categorization fuels division in our modern world. It explores the historical roots of our tendency to categorize, the psychological factors driving it, and how this fundamental human impulse is now amplified by social media and political polarization. Finally, we will explore what steps we can take to begin dismantling these divisive walls.

The Historical Roots of Human Categorization

Our species, Homo sapiens, has survived for roughly 300,000 years. But the Homo genus itself was once populated by multiple human lineages, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. The disappearance of our closest evolutionary cousins is a hotly debated topic. One theory is that Homo sapiens viewed these other human groups as competitors, ultimately driving them to extinction through conflict and resource competition. Whether this is an oversimplification or not, the narrative exemplifies a key human tendency: we have historically needed an “other” to compete against. That primal instinct for survival is closely tied to our inherent drive to categorize.

When early humans formed tribes, they created social bonds with those who shared their language, customs, rituals, and appearance. People from outside those tribes were often met with suspicion. We see echoes of this in modern culture: sports teams (where “our team” is pitted against “their team”), political parties (where our favored party is always right, and the other is always wrong), and even in something as benign as brand loyalty (where fans of one phone manufacturer disparage fans of another).

This historical context matters because it reveals that dividing ourselves into groups has deep evolutionary roots. Categorizing the world around us made sense for survival. Imagine early humans walking through an unfamiliar landscape. Identifying poisonous plants or dangerous animals was crucial, and so was identifying friend from foe. Over time, these mental processes extended from mere survival functions into complex social structures.

The Psychology Behind Categorization

From a psychological standpoint, humans rely on what is known as schema—cognitive frameworks that help us process information quickly. When we label someone as “gay,” “straight,” “tall,” “short,” “wealthy,” or “poor,” our brain immediately activates all the associated stereotypes and assumptions that we have been taught or have accumulated over time. This mental shortcut can be efficient in understanding the world quickly, but it also oversimplifies individuals, reducing them to single attributes.

Another relevant concept is in-group bias, which is the tendency to favor people we perceive as part of our own group over those in other groups. This bias emerges in children as young as three years old, indicating that it is a deeply ingrained cognitive mechanism rather than a purely social construct. Coupled with confirmation bias—our tendency to seek out and interpret information in ways that confirm our pre-existing beliefs—categorization can quickly lead to a self-perpetuating cycle of discrimination or hostility.

Moreover, humans have a well-documented desire for identity and belonging. In a world that feels increasingly chaotic, people yearn for a sense of community and purpose. Sometimes, that means clinging to an identity category (e.g., sexuality, religion, political ideology) with intensity—making it their entire personality, as many critics observe. This can happen in any group: from the fervent nationalist to the passionate social justice advocate. When you invest your whole sense of self in a single group identity, it becomes almost inevitable to view those outside that identity with suspicion or contempt.

Modern Manifestations of Categorization

1. Sexuality and Gender

In recent decades, conversations about sexuality and gender have become more open, which is a positive sign of growing acceptance. However, the flip side is that these nuanced identities can become battlegrounds for division. People who identify as LGBTQ+ might find comfort and community in their labels, yet some individuals outside the community might respond with fear or prejudice, further entrenching divisions. Conversely, those who cling to traditional definitions of gender and sexuality may see changes as a threat to their identity, also leading to hostility.

2. Race and Ethnicity

The color of one’s skin remains a deeply divisive factor globally. Despite advances in civil rights and various diversity initiatives, racism persists. Contemporary society witnesses repeated acts of racially motivated violence, cultural appropriation debates, and political scapegoating of immigrants. One reason these issues persist is the human tendency to put people into boxes based on appearance or ancestry, fueling a never-ending cycle of us vs. them. As technology shrinks the world, these categories remain potent sources of conflict.

3. Height and Physical Traits

The online rhetoric around “short kings” or body-shaming individuals for their height or weight reveals how trivial physical differences can become a source of bullying or fetishization. The superficial nature of these categories doesn’t diminish their emotional impact. When society decides that a certain physical trait is “less than” or “less desirable,” it contributes to an ever-widening gulf between those who feel accepted and those who do not.

4. Disabilities

The rise of disability activism has helped shed light on inclusion and accessibility. However, misunderstanding and prejudice remain. People with disabilities are often seen as “other” or patronized in a way that strips away their individuality. This categorization not only reinforces stigmas but also perpetuates the view that they are separate from the broader community, fostering alienation instead of integration.

5. Socioeconomic Status

The wealth gap is often cited as a significant source of division in modern societies. Whether someone is labeled as rich, middle class, or poor can dictate their social circles, opportunities, and even political affiliations. These economic categories can lead to envy, resentment, or arrogance. It’s why discussions about “eat the rich” and the “1%” can become so heated, or why some wealthy individuals dismiss the struggles of those less privileged. Categorization in terms of money is one of the longest-standing and most profound forms of social division.

6. Education and Occupation

Our educational achievements and career paths can also become markers of division. University attendees might look down on dropouts, while tradespeople might feel disrespected by so-called “intellectual elites.” Gangs and cartels form rigid group identities around territory and loyalty. Influencers are put in a category, and people who partake in sex work—such as OnlyFans creators—are often relegated to the label of “whores” or “sluts” by those who judge or misunderstand them. These categories prevent genuine understanding and empathy because they reduce entire human beings to one aspect of their lives.

7. Political Affiliation

Arguably, political categorization has become one of the most polarizing forms of identity in the modern world. Labels like “liberal,” “conservative,” “communist,” “socialist,” or “libertarian” now carry so much weight that some people can barely have a civil conversation across the aisle. Social media algorithms further entrench these identities by creating echo chambers. Once you label yourself or someone else with a political category, all discourse tends to revolve around stereotypes rather than nuanced perspectives.

The Role of Social Media

In many ways, social media acts as a mirror reflecting our inherent tribalism back at us—only magnified. Platforms like X, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok encourage users to curate personal “brands,” effectively turning themselves into living categories. People identify as certain “types” online, whether it’s a fitness influencer, a beauty guru, a political pundit, or an OnlyFans creator.

Moreover, algorithms prioritize content that sparks engagement, and controversy tends to drive clicks and comments better than harmony. If you express a strong opinion or mock a certain category of people, you’re likely to receive likes, shares, and counterarguments. The feedback loop is self-reinforcing: the more divisive the content, the more attention you get; the more attention you get, the more you’re tempted to create or share divisive content.

This is why categorization thrives on social media. In the online realm, nuance is often lost in favor of quick-hit arguments and pithy memes that reduce complex human identities to punchlines or targets of contempt. And because communication happens behind screens, empathy and nonverbal cues are often absent, making it easier to dehumanize the “other.”

Does Humanity Need an Enemy?

A recurring question emerges from these observations: Does humanity need an enemy? Many philosophers, historians, and psychologists have argued that human identity coalesces around conflict. When we identify strongly with a group, having a clear antagonist or threat can unify us. This pattern shows up throughout history: from tribal warfare to modern nationalism, from sports rivalries to “cancel culture” on social media.

Yet, while an external enemy can unify a group in the short term, it also perpetuates a destructive cycle of “us vs. them.” In the modern globalized world, creating enemies out of entire categories of people has catastrophic consequences. We see everything from religious extremism to xenophobic policies, from hate crimes to online harassment campaigns. The bigger our population grows and the faster we communicate, the more destructive these divisions become.

An argument can be made that competition itself isn’t inherently negative. Healthy competition can drive innovation, ambition, and human progress. The problem arises when competition mutates into hostility, when categories are used as pretexts for denying someone their basic rights or dignity. Unfortunately, the human desire to have an “enemy” often eclipses the possibility of constructive competition, turning categories into irreconcilable barriers.

Consequences of Categorization

1. Increased Hostility and Violence

When people see each other primarily as categories rather than individual human beings, it paves the way for dehumanization. Dehumanization is the gateway to unchecked aggression. War, genocide, mass violence, and hate crimes all become more conceivable when your opponent is “not like us” or is believed to be fundamentally inferior or malevolent.

2. Social Fragmentation and Echo Chambers

As our society continues to segment itself, various subcultures become more insular. Each group exists within its own echo chamber, perpetuating its worldview and distrust of the “other side.” Over time, these echo chambers become more rigid, making reconciliation and mutual understanding increasingly difficult.

3. Loss of Individuality

Overly relying on categories strips individuals of their personal stories. A person who is labeled “uneducated” might have a wealth of lived experience that’s extremely valuable. Someone tagged as “disabled” might have extraordinary talents that go unrecognized because of prevailing stigmas. By confining people to categories, society loses out on the richness of individual identities.

4. Mental Health Struggles

Feeling constantly judged or pigeonholed into an identity category can erode a person’s mental well-being. Anxiety, depression, and loneliness can be exacerbated by societal divisions. Paradoxically, living in a world where more people are connected via digital platforms can lead to a heightened sense of alienation if you’re on the wrong side of the categorization fence.

5. Hindered Progress

In a globally interconnected era, cooperation is essential to tackle large-scale issues like climate change, poverty, and pandemics. When we are entrenched in categories and divisions, it becomes exceedingly difficult to mount unified responses to these global challenges. We end up wasting energy in conflicts that are often fueled by stereotypes rather than addressing the real problems that threaten us all.

Pathways Toward Unity

1. Promote Nuanced Thinking

Teaching critical thinking from a young age can help people question and move beyond stereotypes. Education that emphasizes the complexity of human identity—rather than binary, simplistic labels—fosters open-mindedness and empathy.

2. Encourage Intergroup Contact

Research in social psychology suggests that increased contact between different groups under supportive conditions reduces prejudice. Creating environments in schools, workplaces, and communities where individuals from diverse backgrounds interact as equals is a proven way to diminish fear and misinformation.

3. Cultivate Self-Awareness

We should be conscious of our own tendencies to categorize. If we catch ourselves labeling someone and forming quick judgments based on that label, we can pause and remind ourselves of the person’s individuality. Mindfulness and self-reflection techniques can play a significant role in this process.

4. Use Language Carefully

Words have power. By altering the language we use, we can influence how we think. If a word or label is inherently dehumanizing, we should question our use of it. The key is not censorship but awareness: understanding the weight and history behind certain terms and striving to use language that respects people’s dignity.

5. Social Media Responsibility

Platforms could adjust algorithms to minimize the reward for divisive content. On a personal level, we can be mindful of how we engage online. Rather than attacking or labeling others, we can invite meaningful conversations and resist the urge to respond with insults or dismissals. Unfollowing toxic accounts, reporting hate speech, or engaging in constructive debates can collectively shift online norms.

6. Shared Objectives and Collective Identity

Stressing common goals—like protecting the environment, advancing scientific knowledge, or improving public health—can help people see beyond their differences. When individuals focus on broad objectives that require collaboration, categorization becomes secondary to achieving shared outcomes.

7. Celebrate Complexity

We can challenge the notion that a person’s identity is defined by one category. People are multidimensional—your coworker who loves sports might also be an avid reader of poetry, a supporter of a different political party, and struggling with a personal challenge you know nothing about. Acknowledging and celebrating the myriad facets of each person’s identity can weaken the hold of simplistic labels.

A Way Forward: Embracing Our Shared Humanity

Despite the pervasive nature of categorization, there is hope. Throughout history, moments of unity and empathy have repeatedly broken down barriers once thought insurmountable. The global mobilization against injustices, for instance, shows that many people are willing to look beyond labels to stand for something greater. Tools of communication and connection—though flawed—are more available than ever. This offers unprecedented opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue and the chance to dismantle harmful stereotypes.

The question, then, is how we, as individuals and societies, choose to move forward. Will we continue to let categories define us, fueling division and hostility? Or will we use the information and interconnectedness at our disposal to recognize that our similarities dwarf our differences?

Historically, it’s no secret that humans have needed a foe to rally against. The tragedies of genocide, tribal warfare, and even smaller-scale aggressions are reminders of how potent this drive can be. However, living in a time when nuclear weapons exist, when social media can inflame conflicts instantaneously, and when global crises demand cooperation, the stakes are far too high for us to cling to the old patterns without scrutiny.

We face existential threats—from climate change to pandemics—that do not respect human-made borders or categories. The virus doesn’t care if you are rich or poor, Black or White, tall or short. Rising sea levels will not ask for your political affiliation before flooding your city. If humanity is to survive and flourish, we must recognize that our collective fate is intertwined. The deep-rooted impulse to categorize must be counterbalanced by conscious efforts to unite.

Conclusion

Categorization is an inescapable part of human cognition, woven into our history and our very biology. It can help us navigate the world efficiently by simplifying complex information. Yet this same tool for understanding can easily morph into a weapon of division. We see it in the way entire identities are reduced to labels—sexuality becomes someone’s entire personality, wealth becomes the basis of respect or disdain, physical traits become worth or shame, and so forth. Our penchant for drawing hard lines between “us” and “them” feeds into hostilities that range from online bullying to large-scale violence.

In many senses, our world has advanced: we have better technology, greater awareness of social issues, and more emphasis on human rights than any previous era. Yet these same advancements have also exposed and amplified our age-old tendencies to fragment ourselves into opposing groups. Social media is both a mirror and an accelerant, revealing how deeply ingrained and how dangerous these tendencies can become when left unchecked.

We are left with a fundamental choice: we can continue in the well-worn path of division, or we can actively strive to break the cycle. The latter option requires effort. It calls for education that embraces complexity, personal introspection to identify and dismantle our biases, and collective action that highlights shared humanity over artificial categories. It also demands a careful re-examination of our language, political discourse, and the algorithms that shape our online experiences.

While it may be impossible—and perhaps undesirable—to eliminate all forms of categorization, we can certainly reduce the harms that come from rigid and demeaning labels. By doing so, we take crucial steps toward a more cohesive, empathetic society, one capable of addressing the urgent challenges that face us all, irrespective of race, sexuality, height, ability, or wealth. It’s a challenging journey, but one that holds the promise of genuine unity and collective flourishing.

In the end, if humanity truly does need an enemy, let it be ignorance, injustice, or any force that undermines our collective well-being, rather than our own neighbors, fellow citizens, or those who simply live life in a different way. By shifting the narrative from “us vs. them” to “us for us,” we might finally leverage our capacity for categorization into building bridges rather than walls, leaving behind divisiveness to embrace a shared future.

By Noel | Fowklaw