I have to try different angles to get simple concepts across to you, AJ. I have been down this road before, many times. And most people can grasp that everybody stereotypes in order to think, much earlier than yourself. It is said that those who have high mathematical intelligence (or mathematical "talent") often have poor literary intelligence. (Oops, another stereotype.) So don't worry, you may have trouble with comprehension, but you are probably good at maths.

Here is another angle. If I was to say to you that "there is a flock of birds sitting on a car", you would understand what I said. You could visualise in your mind the concepts, even though they would be imprecise ones. That is because I have used three stereotypes in everyday speech. "Flock", "bird" and "car" are stereotypes. There may be "definite" definitions which say exactly what each of these words mean. But the meaning of all three words are generalisations. And a generalisation is a stereotype. People stereotype in order to think. They simply complex concepts by concentrating on the salient points. And if people stereotype in order to think, then stereotyping can not be wrong. If it is wrong to stereotype, then it is wrong to think.

"Redneck" is a stereotype just as much as a "flock", "bird", and "car". Or "herd", "reactionary", "right wing", "socialist", or "fish". All of these concepts are generalities. You do not need to know exactly what they mean to use them in a sentence. They are for each person, the standardised concepts or images which are the organised beliefs and knowledge that each individual holds about people, events, objects, and situations. They allow us to conceptualise them, and to react to them. Some people may angrily dispute the defined meanings of some words, or insist that they hold different connotations, especially if they are regarded as derogatory. Regardless of what the definition of the word "redneck" means, or even if that definition is accurate, the stereotype of "redneck" can be considered an insult or a badge of honour, depending upon your point of view.

LEGO,

The reason you keep trying different angles is not because I’m having troubles comprehending what you say, but because your arguments are shown to either be fallacious or beside the point. I see today’s angle is ‘collective nouns’.

<<If I was to say to you that "there is a flock of birds sitting on a car", you would understand what I said. You could visualise in your mind the concepts, even though they would be imprecise ones.>>

No, that sentence contains one collective noun and two labels. No stereotypes to be found there.

Collective noun:
A count noun that denotes a group of individuals (e.g. assembly, family, crew).
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/collective-noun?q=collective+noun)

<<"Flock", "bird" and "car">>

Collective noun, label and label.

Stereotype:
A widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing. (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/stereotype)

<<There may be "definite" definitions which say exactly what each of these words mean. But the meaning of all three words are generalisations.>>

Incorrect.

Generalisation:
A general statement or concept obtained by inference from specific cases. (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/generalization?q=generalisation)

<<They simply complex concepts by concentrating on the salient points.>>

And if they stray at all from those salient points, then they no longer suit the label or fit the definition.

<<If it is wrong to stereotype, then it is wrong to think.>>

Only according to one who doesn’t understand the differences between stereotypes, collective nouns, labels and definitions.

I look forward to your next angle of approach.

To AJ

Here is a definition of "Stereotype" from "Understanding Psychology", page 101.

Stereotypes are convenient mental short cuts employed by our perceptual system. This despite the negative associations associated with prejudice and discriminatory behaviour. Stereotypes then, are organising strategies based upon habits, experience, and cultural folklore, that allow an individual to assess a new experience in their environment. Stereotyping involves identifying some salient feature of an object or event, and using this to predict other aspects of this object or event.

"Understanding Psychology" page 101.

Psychologists use the term "schema" to refer to a mental representation of a class of people, events, objects, or situations. Stereotypes are a type of schema because they represent classes of people, for example Italians, women, and athletes.

"Psychology" page 289.

The definitions I posted do not invalidate your own definition, nor are they different to yours. They are simply definitions that apply more to how human beings think. Human beings think by stereotyping. If I were to say that there is a flock of birds sitting on a car, your mind creates an image based upon your stereotypical concepts of a "flock", a "bird", or a "car."

Like stereotyping rednecks or socialists, the stereotypes of a flock, bird, or car, does not have to be accurate. Only accurate enough to form a concept. You do not need to know how many make up a flock, what type of bird it is, or what type or brand of car it is. You mind only need to blend together your stereotypical images of these concepts, and your mind understands what is being said.

Human beings think by stereotyping concepts. People also use stereotypes as an aid to memory. Unless you stereotype, you have no concept at all of what a Zulu or an Eskimo even looks like. Nor what they live in, eat, wear, or the sort of environment that they usually reside in.

AJ Generalisations are always wrong.

LEGO Your stereotype about "generalisations", is that they are always wrong.

AJ This is the problem with your arguments, they sound as if they are well reasoned, yet they are based on fallacious reasoning.

LEGO Your stereotype of my arguments is that they based on fallacious reasoning.

AJ Your entire worldview is a network of over-simplifications and generalisations, making it so easy take down.

LEGO. Your stereotype of my worldview is that it is a network of over simplifications and generalisations. By stereotyping me, you have over simplified and generalised my worldview.

AJ Generalisations will always be wrong when you apply them to large populations.

LEGO Your (revised) stereotype of "generalisations" is that they are always wrong when applied to large populations.

AJ There's forming concepts and there's judging entire groups of individuals based on a stereotype.

LEGO You can not form a concept unless you stereotype what it is that you want to form a concept about.

AJ. Rightism is an ideology because it is a network of ideas, not just loyalty.

LEGO. Your stereotype of "rightism" is that it is an ideology.

AJ So what? That doesn’t make it good or right unless, again, you want to appeal to the Common Practice fallacy.

LEGO Paste up the Common Practice Theory and I will point out the stereotypes.

AJ (A redneck is) ....a politically reactionary working-class white person from the southern US.

LEGO If you agree with the Oxford dictionaries definition of a redneck, then that is your stereotype of a redneck.

AJ (In response to me asking you "how do you judge groups of people?") Simple. Either don’t, or use qualifiers such as “most”, “many”, and “some”.

If you use "most" people, you are stereotyping "most" people. If you use "many" people, you are stereotyping "many" people. If you use "some" people, you are stereotyping "some" people.

AJ Labels are not stereotypes.

LEGO. Wrong. Labels can be stereotypes, especially derogatory labels. That is why the same idiots who say that "it is wrong to stereotype", also say it is "wrong to label.

LEGO,

I see your next angle of approach is concepts, and confusing them with stereotypes.

<<The definitions I posted do not invalidate your own definition, nor are they different to yours.>>

You mean the Oxford’s definition that I accept, but yeah.

<<They are simply definitions that apply more to how human beings think.>>

“…there is ‘thinking in stereotypes’ and then there’s the inability to move past them when attempting to reason in complex situations.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17896#317623)

Appeals to nature and common practice are fallacies because being natural or common practice is not indicative of its goodness or rightness. Stereotyping can be very harmful, and that’s what makes it wrong. Rape and wife beating are also natural with psychological-evolutionary explanations for them, but that doesn’t make them good or right. Furthermore, even if labelling a car a “car” were stereotyping, there would be no harm in doing so.

<<Human beings think by stereotyping.>>

Not always. Intelligent people are able to look past them and understand in what situations it is appropriate to do so.

<<If I were to say that there is a flock of birds sitting on a car, your mind creates an image based upon your stereotypical concepts of a "flock", a "bird", or a "car.">>

Not quite.

Stereotype:
A widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing. (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/stereotype)

The operative words being “fixed” and “oversimplified”. The concepts that I draw on would not necessarily be either of these.
<<Like stereotyping rednecks or socialists, the stereotypes of a flock, bird, or car, does not have to be accurate.>>

You’re confusing stereotypes with concepts.

Concept:
An abstract idea (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/concept)

As for all your quotes used to try to make it look like I’m contradicting myself, I’ve already explained those and how they differ from what I’m arguing against, so posting them up like that only makes you look like a fool with the memory of a fish. You've also misquoted me, demonstrating your dishonesty and harming an innocent strawman in the process.

I look forward to your next angle of approach.

AJ Appeals to nature and common practice are fallacies because being natural or common practice is not indicative of its goodness or rightness.

LEGO "Goodness" and "rightness" are relative terms. Hitler believed that he was both good and right.

AJ Stereotyping can be very harmful, and that’s what makes it wrong.

LEGO If you say that stereotyping is wrong, then you are labelling the act of stereotyping with a negative prejudgement. That is stereotyping. In addition, telling the truth can be harmful. Is telling the truth therefore wrong?

AJ Rape and wife beating are also natural with psychological-evolutionary explanations for them, but that doesn’t make them good or right.

LEGO People stereotype to think. How you can equate the means by which people think with wife beating is beyond me,

AJ Furthermore, even if labelling a car a “car” were stereotyping, there would be no harm in doing so.

Thank you for admitting that you need to stereotype to conceptualise "a car." You must be like a wife beater. If you have finally figured out that you need to stereotype to conceptualise a "car", then it must be sitting uncomfortably in your mind that you need to stereotype to conceptualise events, situations, or people, too.

AJ Intelligent people are able to look past (stereotyping) and understand in what situations it is appropriate to do so.

LEGO You have finally recognised that people need to stereotype to think, haven't you AJ? Great, you just crossed the Rubicon. I am getting somewhere.

AJ You are confusing stereotypes with concepts.

LEGO. No, I am saying that everybody, including "intelligent" people, use stereotypes to form concepts in their mind.

AJ As for all your quotes used to try to make it look like I’m contradicting myself, I’ve already explained those and how they differ from what I’m arguing against, so posting them up like that only makes you look like a fool with the memory of a fish. I look forward to your next angle of approach.

LEGO I am quite happy with the approach I have.

I've got you now, AJ.