“One can be ignorant without being prejudiced, though one cannot be prejudiced without being ignorant.”– Modern Romanticism
Take the singular individual, separated from the group, and in one’s sight upon them, there can be the statement that says there is ignorance for them. As in, the observant person has no knowledge of them. In this example, there could be no prejudice, since there is nothing for comparison’s sake. Two individuals come to know one another, due to their separations from the group. This is the method in which people no longer notice difference.
Take the same singular individual and the same observant person to them, to then place the former in their group in which the latter would be prejudiced against of all. Prejudice is possible in this second scenario, since the ignorance to prejudice is now swapped into prejudice to ignorance.
If a person is, at first, ignorant, then prejudice is not possible. However, if a person is, at first, prejudiced, then their ignorance is to the individualism for each person, among the observed group. Individualism can be told apart, when it is separated from the collective. Though, it must be a separation, or otherwise prejudice is a high likelihood.
Humans observe what is their ignorance towards a group, as this is similar to viewing a collection of books among the same genre. If the book genre is disliked, then no individual book will be opened so that knowledge remedies the prejudice. Whether it is prejudice against book or against people, the ignorance is always in viewing the group and in the unwillingness to separate individual from the rest. However, even of a person who likes the genre or specific group of people have prejudice to this, since it is only in the liking of the genre or group that they were attracted.