Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Other

Other is an English determiner, adjective, pronoun, and adverb used to refer to an additional, alternative, or distinct person, thing, or instance from one already mentioned or implied, as in "the other shoe" or "do you have other plans?" Its etymology traces to Old English ōþer, meaning "second" or "one of two," from Proto-Germanic *anþeraz (comparative of "one"), ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *h₂énteros, a form denoting "the one beyond" or "further." In linguistic structure, "other" functions to mark contrast or supplementation in , such as in definite descriptions ("the other man") or indefinite contexts ("some other time"), enabling precise referential distinctions essential to communication. Beyond core , the term influences conceptual frameworks, including where it aids in defining self through relation to external entities.

Linguistics

Grammatical functions

In , the word "other" primarily functions as a , specifying an alternative, additional, or remaining entity distinct from one already mentioned or implied. As a , it precedes and modifies nouns without inflecting for number, applying to both singular countable nouns (e.g., "other ") and plural or uncountable nouns (e.g., "other suspects" or "other "). This usage contrasts with articles like "the" or "a," as "other" introduces indefiniteness tied to , often implying exclusion from a known set. "Other" also operates as a , particularly in its plural form "," to stand alone in reference to multiple additional or alternative or things. For instance, in constructions like "Few agreed, but did," "" replaces a while maintaining anaphoric ties to prior context. Singular pronominal uses are rarer and typically involve "the other" for specificity (e.g., "One was red; the other was blue"), distinguishing it from indefinite forms like "another." In traditional descriptive grammars, "other" is sometimes categorized as an due to its attributive position before nouns, as in "other options." However, functionalist and generative linguistic analyses classify it predominantly as a because it occupies the initial slot in noun phrases, resists with other determiners (e.g., incompatible with "the other books" in non-idiomatic senses), and expresses quantificational or identificational relations akin to or indefinites. This status underscores its role in delimiting reference, often contrasting with a focal element in , as in structures like "more efficient than other methods." Related forms include "another," which functions as an indefinite or for singular countable nouns, combining "an" with "other" to denote one additional unspecified item (e.g., "another example"). "The other," by contrast, serves as a definite or , referring to a specific counterpart or within a partitioned set (e.g., "the other half"). These distinctions highlight "other"'s versatility in encoding alternation and complementarity, integral to English's system of and quantification.

Etymology and historical usage

The adjective and pronoun "other" originates from ōþer, denoting "second," "the second of two," or "additional," with usages recorded as early as the pre-1150 period. This form derives from Proto-Germanic *anþeraz, which carried similar connotations of contrast or alternation, ultimately tracing to Proto-Indo-European *h₂énteros or *ánteros, implying "the one of two" or a sense beyond the primary. Cognates appear across , including annarr, andar, and modern ander, reflecting a shared Indo-European root emphasizing duality or distinction from a primary entity. In historical English usage, "other" functioned primarily to indicate difference or supplementarity, often in dual contexts such as "oþer" contrasting with "þæt" (that) in texts like the , where it denoted an alternative or remaining option among pairs. By , around the , it evolved into other, retaining its role in constructions like "an other," which contracted to "another" by early 13th century to signify "one more" or "different," as seen in Chaucer's works distinguishing sequential or variant items. This period marked expansion beyond strict duality, incorporating senses of "different from" or "not the same," evident in legal and texts emphasizing without numerical implication. Linguistically, "other" has historically served as an indefinite determiner and pronoun, enabling comparative structures essential for negation or specification, such as in Old English "nænig oþer" (no other), which persisted into Modern English for expressing exclusivity or remainder. The verb form "to other," meaning to render alien or distinct, first appeared in 1810 in Samuel Taylor Coleridge's writings, reflecting a shift toward abstract relational usage influenced by philosophical discourse, though its core adjectival and pronominal roles remained stable in everyday language evolution. This endurance underscores "other's" foundational role in Indo-European syntax for binary opposition, predating specialized comparatives like "second."

Philosophy

Core concept of the Other

In philosophy, the concept of the Other refers to the irreducible existence of beings or consciousnesses distinct from the self, highlighting themes of , recognition, and that challenge solipsistic self-understanding. This notion underscores how the self's identity emerges not in isolation but through confrontation with external difference, often involving conflict, , or ethical demand. Originating in and developed in 20th-century phenomenology and , the Other serves as a dialectical counterpart essential for constituting subjectivity, rather than a mere empirical observation of others. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel introduced a foundational formulation in his Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), where self-consciousness requires negation and recognition by the Other in a struggle for dominance, as exemplified in the master-slave dialectic. Here, two self-consciousnesses encounter each other, leading to a life-and-death fight where the victor (master) initially dominates but ultimately depends on the defeated (slave) for validation, revealing that true demands reciprocal acknowledgment rather than unilateral assertion. This process illustrates the Other not as an obstacle but as constitutive of the self's freedom and universality through synthesis of opposites. Jean-Paul Sartre advanced the concept in Being and Nothingness (1943), portraying the Other's gaze as an invasive force that objectifies the subject, stripping away spontaneous freedom and reducing the self to a mere thing-in-the-world observed by another . For Sartre, this "look" generates inescapable conflict, as the self seeks to reclaim subjectivity by imposing its own , encapsulating existential in the phrase "" from his play (1944), where interpersonal scrutiny perpetually undermines autonomy. Unlike Hegel's potential for , Sartre's view emphasizes perpetual antagonism arising from the Other's over the self's projects. Emmanuel Levinas reframed the Other in ethical terms in Totality and Infinity (1961), positing the face-to-face encounter as an asymmetrical relation where the Other's —manifest in and command—precedes and disrupts the self's totality, demanding infinite without reciprocity. This shifts the core from dialectical struggle or to primordial obligation, where arises not from rational calculation but from the Other's ethical appeal that exposes the self's . Levinas critiques prior ontologies for subsuming the Other into the same, advocating instead an grounded in radical that resists totalization.

Key thinkers and developments

introduced the concept of the Other in his Phenomenology of Spirit (1807), particularly through the master-slave , where emerges dialectically via a life-and-death struggle for recognition by another self-conscious being. In this framework, the master's dependence on the slave for validation reveals the inadequacy of domination, as true mutual recognition requires reciprocity rather than subjugation. Jean-Paul Sartre advanced the idea in Being and Nothingness (1943), portraying the Other as an existential threat through "the Look," whereby the gaze of another reduces the subject from a free, transcendent being-for-itself to an objectified being-in-itself, engendering and conflict inherent to . Sartre argued this encounter disrupts solipsistic freedom, forcing awareness of one's objecthood in the world's shared structure, though he critiqued it as leading to inescapable rather than ethical resolution. Emmanuel Levinas reframed the Other in Totality and Infinity (1961) as the basis for ethics as first philosophy, transcending Hegelian and Sartrean totality by emphasizing the , irreducible encountered in the face-to-face relation, which commands without reciprocity or to the self's horizons. Levinas posited that this ethical asymmetry—where the Other's vulnerability prohibits violence—precedes , challenging totalizing systems like history or reason that subsume . Subsequent developments extended these ideas into phenomenology and ; for instance, Jacques Derrida's (from the 1960s onward) interrogated binary oppositions involving the Other, revealing their instability, while maintaining a critical distance from Levinas' ethical primacy due to concerns over undecidability. These evolutions shifted focus from dialectical conflict to ethical and linguistic , influencing fields beyond philosophy, though critiques highlight their speculative nature absent empirical validation of intersubjective mechanisms.

Psychology and evolutionary biology

Ingroup-outgroup distinctions

Ingroup-outgroup distinctions constitute a fundamental aspect of social categorization in which individuals classify themselves and others into a primary group to which they belong (ingroup) and external groups (outgroups), typically resulting in and toward ingroup members compared to outgroup members. This binary perceptual framework emerges rapidly in human cognition, often within milliseconds of encountering novel faces or , and manifests across cultures and age groups, with children as young as 3 years old displaying rudimentary ingroup preferences in sharing tasks. Empirical studies indicate that such distinctions do not require prior conflict or shared history; instead, they arise from minimal like shared labels or perceptual similarities. The , developed by and colleagues in experiments from 1970 to 1971 involving over 100 adolescent boys, provides robust evidence for the of these distinctions. Participants were arbitrarily assigned to groups based on ostensibly trivial criteria, such as preferring abstract paintings by Klee or Kandinsky artists, with no interaction among group members. When allocating monetary rewards via matrices, subjects consistently favored their ingroup by maximizing intergroup differences (e.g., awarding 20 points to ingroup and 7 to outgroup) over maximizing joint gain or equality, even when personal gain was unaffected. Replication across diverse populations, including adults and non-Western samples, confirms that this bias persists with effect sizes around d=0.6, independent of . From an evolutionary standpoint, ingroup-outgroup distinctions likely trace to ancestral adaptations for kin selection and coalitional psychology, where favoring genetic relatives or reliable allies enhanced survival in competitive environments. Mathematical models demonstrate that ingroup favoritism evolves stably when intergroup competition imposes fitness costs, as individuals investing preferentially in perceived cooperators within their coalition outcompete indiscriminate strategists. Comparative data from chimpanzees reveal analogous biases, with individuals sharing food 2-3 times more with group mates than outsiders, suggesting deep phylogenetic roots predating Homo sapiens by millions of years. These distinctions promote parochial altruism—cooperation within the group paired with vigilance toward outsiders—rather than inherent outgroup hostility, as meta-analyses show ingroup love accounts for 70-80% of bias variance, with derogation emerging mainly under threat.

Adaptive functions of othering

In , the process of othering—categorizing individuals or groups as outsiders—serves adaptive functions by enhancing survival through mechanisms like pathogen avoidance, threat detection, and optimized . These functions likely arose in ancestral environments where small-scale societies faced recurrent risks from unfamiliar conspecifics, including disease transmission, resource competition, and intergroup violence. Empirical models link othering to the behavioral , where outgroup cues trigger avoidance behaviors to minimize risks from novel pathogens, as strangers historically carried higher disease loads than kin or familiars. A key adaptive role involves disease avoidance, where othering amplifies responses toward outgroup members, functioning as a low-cost to reduce exposure to contagious agents. Experimental evidence shows that priming individuals with threats increases against dissimilar groups, correlating with elevated in regions with high infectious . This mechanism, rooted in the evolved system, promotes hygiene practices and from potential carriers, thereby boosting by preserving group health without requiring costly individual vigilance. Othering also facilitates coalitional strategies for intergroup conflict, as outlined in the male warrior hypothesis, which posits that human males evolved heightened aggression toward outgroups to secure resources, mates, and territory. and cross-cultural data indicate that ingroup-outgroup distinctions activate reward centers for in-group while priming defensive postures against perceived outgroup threats, enabling effective alliances in warfare-like scenarios common in societies. This bias toward outgroup enhances group-level competitiveness, with historical and ethnographic records showing that cohesive ingroups with strong othering tendencies outcompeted diffuse rivals in resource-scarce environments. Additionally, othering supports kin selection and reciprocal altruism by channeling prosocial behaviors toward phenotypically similar individuals, who are statistically more likely to share genes or enforce reciprocity norms. Ingroup favoritism, rather than mere outgroup hostility, drives this adaptation, as minimal group paradigms demonstrate preferential resource allocation to arbitrary ingroups, fostering trust and mutual aid within boundaries that minimize cheating risks. Such distinctions reduce exploitation in repeated interactions, with game-theoretic models confirming that even mild othering stabilizes cooperation equilibria in finite populations facing defection threats from outsiders. While these functions were calibrated for Pleistocene-scale threats, contemporary applications may yield mismatches, yet their persistence underscores selective pressures favoring perceptual boundaries between self and other.

Social sciences

Othering in sociology

In sociology, othering describes the process by which individuals or groups construct social boundaries by defining an out-group as , inferior, or threatening to the in-group's and position, thereby reinforcing hierarchies and justifying exclusionary practices. This mechanism operates through symbolic attribution, where perceived differences in , , , or behavior are amplified into essential traits that legitimize unequal treatment. Unlike psychological framings focused on individual , sociological accounts emphasize structural and interactional dynamics, where othering sustains institutions like or policies that embed disadvantage. A core theoretical foundation is Herbert Blumer's group position theory, outlined in his 1958 paper "Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position," which argues that prejudice stems from a dominant group's collective awareness of its superior standing relative to subordinates, rather than mere personal animus. When out-groups are perceived as encroaching—through demographic shifts or resource competition—this positional threat provokes othering to reassert proprietary claims over social, economic, or cultural domains. Blumer's symbolic interactionist approach highlights how such sentiments are collectively negotiated in everyday interactions and public discourse, as evidenced in historical analyses of U.S. during the mid-20th century civil rights era, where white southerners framed as an existential challenge to their communal status. Empirical extensions, such as surveys tracking perceived intergroup competition, confirm that heightened othering correlates with policy resistance, with data from the American National Election Studies (1948–2020) showing spikes in anti-immigrant sentiment amid economic downturns like the 2008 recession. Sociological applications of othering extend to deviance and stratification studies, where —pioneered by Howard Becker in the —posits that societal reactions to nonconformity amplify marginalization, turning minor deviations into master statuses of otherness. For instance, in , othering of homeless populations through ordinances banning public sleeping, as documented in analyses of 1990s–2010s municipal codes in major U.S. cities, perpetuates cycles of exclusion by framing as a moral threat rather than a structural outcome of shortages. In global contexts, postcolonial sociologists apply othering to explain persistent North-South divides, attributing phenomena like aid dependency to Western constructions of developing nations as perpetually backward, though data from indicators (1960–2023) reveal that internal governance failures, not solely external othering, account for 60–70% of variance in growth disparities across low-income states. Critiques within note that othering frameworks, prevalent in , often exhibit directional by privileging narratives of dominant-group while underemphasizing reciprocal processes, such as subordinate groups' othering of perceived oppressors to foster —a pattern observed in ethnographic studies of ethnic enclaves where in-group purity norms exclude . This selective emphasis aligns with institutional tendencies in social sciences toward pathologizing majority behaviors, potentially overlooking universal intergroup dynamics substantiated by cross-cultural surveys like the (1981–2022), which document in 90% of societies regardless of power asymmetry. Consequently, while othering elucidates causal pathways to , rigorous application requires integrating bidirectional evidence to avoid conflating descriptive process with normative indictment.

Controversies in identity politics

Identity politics, which often relies on constructing outgroups as existential threats to ingroup dignity and resources, has been criticized for deepening societal divisions rather than resolving them. Critics contend that by essentializing identities and framing conflicts in zero-sum terms, it amplifies othering, transforming policy disagreements into moral crusades against perceived oppressors. This approach, rooted in demands for recognition, risks eroding shared civic bonds essential to liberal democracies. Political scientist argued in 2018 that constitutes a "new " that fragments national cohesion by prioritizing particular group claims over liberal principles. He observed that while early identity movements addressed legitimate grievances—such as civil rights expansions in the —subsequent iterations on the left validated select identities while dismissing others, like those of working-class majorities, fostering and . Fukuyama linked this to electoral shifts, including the 2016 U.S. presidential outcome, where alienated non-elite groups rejected cosmopolitan elites perceived as dismissive of their thymos, or desire for respect. Social psychologist differentiates "common-humanity" , which mobilizes against specific injustices while affirming shared values, from "common-enemy" variants that portray society as an ongoing battle between virtuous ingroups and irredeemable outgroups. The latter, Haidt asserts, leverages evolutionary tribal instincts to inflame suspicion and hatred, as seen in intersectional frameworks that categorize individuals by stacked oppressions and privileges, often stifling dissent through accusations of complicity in systemic harm. This dynamic, prevalent in academic and activist circles since the , correlates with disinvitation attempts, which rose from 20 in 2000 to over 100 annually by 2017. Empirical research underscores these concerns, showing identity-driven heightens affective , where political opponents are dehumanized as moral deviants rather than fellow citizens with differing views. A 2018 study analyzing U.S. survey data found that ideological self-identification—often tied to —predicts stronger negative emotions toward out-partisans than issue disagreements alone, exacerbating gridlock on topics like and . Similarly, a 2023 analysis of responses revealed that stronger endorsement of among progressives predicts lower , with self-reported happiness scores declining by up to 0.5 points on a 3-point scale compared to conservatives with comparable ideologies. Controversies extend to backlash effects, where aggressive othering of majority or traditional identities provokes defensive . Cross-national data from 2015–2020 elections in indicate that mainstream parties' emphasis on and —hallmarks of —correlates with far-right vote shares increasing by 1–2 percentage points per policy shift, as voters react against perceived erosion of cultural norms. In the U.S., this manifests in heightened partisan sorting, with 92% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats viewing the opposing party as a to national vitality by , up from 50% in 1994. Such patterns suggest , while empowering some margins, inadvertently entrenches adversarial binaries that hinder cross-group cooperation on shared challenges like .

Arts and entertainment

In , representations of the Other frequently serve to delineate boundaries between the and threatening , often through antagonists that embody cultural, racial, or existential . productions from the late to the late consistently portrayed non-Western peoples—such as , Soviets, or —as vilified enemies in films like (1994) and (1994), patterns that reinforced by contrasting domestic normalcy against foreign deviance. These depictions aligned with geopolitical tensions, using the Other to justify narrative triumphs of the in-group, though such analyses from postcolonial scholarship warrant scrutiny for their tendency to frame Western agency primarily as oppressive rather than adaptive to real threats. Horror and science fiction genres literalize the Other as monstrous invaders or mutants, exploiting fears of bodily or societal contamination to explore human vulnerability. In horror, creatures like zombies in George A. Romero's (1968) or shape-shifters in John Carpenter's (1982) symbolize social others—racial minorities, the poor, or the infected—challenging viewers to confront intertwined self-other dynamics rather than absolute separation. extends this to extraterrestrials, as in Independence Day (1996), where alien hordes unify disparate humans against a common existential threat, reflecting mid-1990s optimism for assimilation under duress. Empirical patterns in these genres show the Other's defeat restoring order, with data from over 1,000 SF films indicating aliens or robots as proxies for racial anxieties, though interpretations vary by era and director intent. Television amplifies othering through serialized portrayals of cultural outsiders, often stereotyping minorities as perpetual threats or comic relief to sustain viewer identification with protagonists. Shows like (2016–2022) depict android hosts as racial and class analogs to exploited others, mirroring historical subjugation while critiquing technological . Food programming, such as segments on , consumes ethnic cuisines as exotic markers of otherness, framing non-Western traditions as consumable novelties that affirm viewer superiority without deeper integration. Representation studies document persistent underrepresentation—e.g., only 7.8% of speaking roles for Hispanics in top films from 2007–2022, extending to TV—perpetuating othering via limited, tokenized roles amid industry data showing slow diversification. Academic critiques here, often from , highlight bias reinforcement but overlook market-driven incentives for familiarity over .

Literature

In literature, the concept of the Other manifests through depictions of characters or societies defined by their from a normative , often serving to explore themes of , , and exclusion. This portrayal frequently appears in colonial-era narratives where non- peoples are rendered exotic, primitive, or threatening to affirm the cultural superiority of the . Postcolonial responses invert or such dynamics, granting to the marginalized Other to challenge binaries. Joseph Conrad's (1899) exemplifies early modern othering, with the African interior and its inhabitants portrayed as an enigmatic, savage antithesis to European rationality, embodied in Kurtz's descent into barbarism. The novella's symbolic language—rivers as veins of darkness, natives as shadows—reinforces this binary, though Conrad's intent has been debated as a critique of rather than mere . Chinua Achebe's 1975 lecture condemned the work for dehumanizing Africans, arguing it perpetuates a racist gaze that denies them full humanity. Postcolonial literature counters such representations by humanizing the Other. Chinua Achebe's (1958) depicts pre-colonial society in with cultural depth, subverting the primitive Other trope by centering indigenous perspectives before intrusion disrupts traditional order. Similarly, Tayeb Salih's Season of Migration to the North (1966) reverses colonial narratives, following a Sudanese man's infiltration of society to expose mutual othering and the psychological scars of empire. Earlier works like William Shakespeare's (c. 1603) illustrate othering through racial and cultural , with the Moorish general positioned as an exotic outsider in society, vulnerable to Iago's manipulations exploiting fears of miscegenation and foreignness. Othello's self-perception as "one that loved not wisely but too well" reflects internalized otherness amid . Jean Rhys's (1966), a to Charlotte Brontë's , reclaims the voice of , the Creole "madwoman" othered as a monstrous colonial relic, revealing her as Antoinette Cosway, a product of racial and economic marginalization in post-emancipation . This feminist-postcolonial revision critiques the original's silencing of hybrid identities. These examples underscore literature's role in both perpetuating and dismantling othering, with postcolonial critiques often highlighting biases in canonical Western texts while analyses note interpretive variances, such as Conrad's anti-imperial undertones amid stereotypical depictions.

Music

In , the study of from diverse cultures has frequently involved processes of othering, particularly in its formative years when non-Western musical traditions were categorized as "primitive" or exotic relative to European norms. Pioneering scholars such as , who taught courses explicitly titled "Primitive " at in the mid-20th century, exemplified this approach by positioning such musics as fundamentally alien to the Western self, thereby reinforcing colonial-era hierarchies of cultural value. This framing persisted in early fieldwork, where researchers often extracted sounds and practices from their contexts to serve as objects of analysis, undervaluing and treating the "other's" as a deficit-laden curiosity rather than an autonomous system. Contemporary critiques within the field, including calls for decolonial methods, highlight how such othering marginalized non-Western epistemologies, though applied now seeks to mitigate this through that prioritizes local voices over extractive . Popular music genres have both perpetuated and interrogated othering through , performance, and cultural narratives. In , women were systematically othered as peripheral "groupies," reduced to sexualized appendages of performers, which entrenched hegemonic and marketplace dynamics that devalued agency in the . Similarly, music faced romantic in white interpretations, where its themes of suffering were idealized as authentic "black experience" to affirm Anglo-American redemption narratives, entrenching racial binaries without acknowledging the genre's internal complexities. , originating in marginalized urban communities, frequently employs othering dialectics in to construct ingroup identity against external threats—such as or rival factions—serving adaptive functions like solidarity-building amid socioeconomic exclusion, though this can reinforce adversarial stereotypes. Examples include tracks critiquing systemic othering, as in certain narratives that invert power dynamics by portraying the as the dehumanized outsider. Western classical music engages through structural and thematic means, where composers evoke the "other" via dissonant harmonies or exoticized motifs to represent psychological or cultural estrangement. Igor Stravinsky's tango-infused works, for instance, use rhythmic displacement to convey emotional otherness without alienating the listener entirely, bridging self and other in auditory form. Philosophically, musical encounters can challenge reductive othering by fostering epistemic understanding of , as when listeners derive of unfamiliar subjectivities from sonic patterns that resist simplistic categorization. However, historical insertions of non- elements into repertoires often served to exoticize rather than integrate, perpetuating a bias that views such sounds as ornamental deviations from the normative self. These dynamics underscore music's dual capacity: reinforcing ingroup-outgroup boundaries while occasionally disrupting them through shared affective resonance.

Names and miscellaneous

As a personal name

Other is a rare surname of Scandinavian origin, derived from the personal name Ottur (genitive form indicating "son of Ottur"), where Ottur means "otter" or "terror of an army." Early records in England date to 1273, including Edward Oter of Cambridgeshire. The name entered English usage amid Viking influences and post-Norman migrations, though its etymology ties directly to Norse nomenclature rather than the English word "other." Global incidence stands at approximately 1,163 bearers, ranking it the 321,153rd most common worldwide. Distribution is concentrated in (641 individuals, highest density), (222), and (93), with smaller populations in , , , and . This modern skew toward and may reflect variations of similar names like Othman in contexts, though primary records affirm the root. Historical bearers include Frederick Other, who migrated from to , , in 1847 amid 19th-century waves of driven by economic instability. No widely notable figures—such as in , , or sciences—are documented with the surname Other in verifiable historical or contemporary records. As a given name, Other lacks established usage or prominence in naming databases.

Other applications

Othering has been applied in to explain the cognitive and social processes that foster and by emphasizing perceived differences between ingroups and outgroups, often resulting in and hierarchical social structures. This aligns with foundational effects like , where individuals categorize others as threats or inferiors to reinforce self-identity, as observed in experimental studies on . In clinical contexts, othering contributes to disparities, with marginalized groups experiencing heightened stress from exclusionary perceptions that undermine belonging. In and , the concept illuminates structural factors in health inequalities, where minority populations are positioned as "others" opposite to dominant norms, exacerbating access barriers and outcomes like higher morbidity rates among stigmatized groups. For instance, othering manifests in healthcare delivery through implicit biases that marginalize patients based on or , embedding power imbalances in clinical interactions and policy. emphasizes its role in perpetuating inequities, as structural othering—via institutional practices—limits equitable care without direct interpersonal . Applications extend to organizational management, where othering undermines by labeling employees outside normalized traits as outsiders, reducing and ; surveys indicate it correlates with higher turnover in diverse teams. Mitigation strategies include leadership training to dismantle such dynamics, fostering through shared narratives. In environmental discourse, othering frames climate impacts by portraying vulnerable populations, such as migrants, as threats or victims distinct from "us," influencing through biopolitical lenses that prioritize certain groups' over equitable responses. This process shapes narratives around , reinforcing exclusion in debates as of 2021 analyses.