In almost all cases, inhumanization is used to exacerbate the destruction of social norms, the former applies to non-human actors, and the latter applies to inhuman acts or processes. Since the social norm defines humanitarian behavior, these same social norms define that human behavior is inhuman. Humanization is different from inhumane behavior and processes, including the emergence of new competing social norms. This rise is a humanitarian act until old norms lose new norms of competition and then redefine inhumane behavior. Even if a new norm can not be accepted, that behavior is still inhumane and its severity is equivalent to past past examples. However, the definition of inhumanization is still in the type - a reflexive state symbolizing ambiguity compared to the scale of individuals and society.
Slavery is the most obvious example of the inhumanization of blacks, leaving a legacy of unequal treatment. For the purposes of this paper, inhumanization is defined as a process of depriving people of personality, attributes, and rights such as personality, compassion, civilization (Feagan, 2001; Maiese, 2003). This is a process by which a group of people declare other group's inferiority through subtle or public actions or statements and can be directed by an organization (such as state) It can be a combination. Thus, inhumanization is a psychological process that makes some people unnoticed or not humanitarian, and inhumanization helps to eliminate individuals morally from social norms. Maiese (2003) explains that ideology, skin color, cognitive abilities are often the criteria for elimination, and thinks that those who try to eliminate inhumane acts of others are the threat of their happiness Tend.