Talk:Shallow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Sometimes social roles may prescribe shallowness, which gives rise to a paradox: is it innate shallowness that causes the selection of a role, or the role which mandates the display of shallowness? The answer to this probably varies between different individuals, although it is arguable that stereotyped roles are shallow by their very nature, and hence the shallowness and role-playing are two sides of the same coin."

What are the "social roles" that this paragraph refers to here? -- Rotem Dan 08:01 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I was originally thinking of the girly girl stereotype but have since removed the reference as it was considered POV. I guess "bimbo" might be a more suitable candidate. LordK 19:35 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I think this paragraph is POV, but even more, possibly meaningless, I'll explain why: first, everything inside it is opinions, a stereotype, is a mental picture held by pepole on some group that has a common quality. It is by no means a concrete, real thing, there is no such thing as a girly girl, tomboy or a bimbo, it is a stereotype, or an "over-simplified" generalization that exists on people minds.

Now it states that it gives rise to a paradox, this is an opinion, not a fact. I, for example, do not agree that such paradox exists. Then, it tries to answer this "paradox" by comparing mental pictures: one, the stereotype of a typical shallow person. Second: the stereotype of some social role. None of this exists in reality, pepole are different from each other and would probably not ascribe to such over-simplified categorization.

While I admire your attempt of putting your own insights and interpretations (I did this myself on some instances), I think you should review what part of this actually relates to the objective reality, rather than some subjective "mental pictures". I think the analysis is interesting, but would probably be more suitable to the Meta wikipedia. -- Rotem Dan 20:08 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes you are right, that paragraph probably is opinion not fact (although I personally believe it to be factually true, but it is not an undisputed fact and is therefore not objective). I will remove that part of the text. Incidentally, the plural of "person" is "people" not "pepole" (for future reference). LordK 21:06 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes, I keep making that typo all the time, also, for some reason I write "contributer" instead of "contributor", these are mistakes I have been making for years, I guess it got rooted somehow :) -- Rotem Dan 22:09 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)