I define "Exterius" as the synthesis of all one does not identify oneself with, and what one wants to avoid to be. Then, anyone who is different from oneself in certain ways will be called with a certain word, usually with negative connotations.
For example, some people have experienced in online "political" (or even just social/cultural, the distinctions are very blurry on social media) discussions, to be called "far-left" by some people and "far-right" by others. One interpretation (which may be explored in a different page) is that one is indeed far-left and far-right simultaneously (likely this interpretation can be argued more easily accepting the horseshoe theory as valid). However, in this page, the following interpretation is given: one is not far-left nor far-right, but to be called that way is simply because the one who is doing the calling sees "Exterius" in the person who is called negatively. In the context of online "political" discussions on social media, generally speaking, those calling others "far-left" identify themselves as right-wing, whereas those calling others "far-right" identify themselves as left-wing. The most remarkable example is National Socialism (a.k.a. Nazism), an ideology that seems to horde a huge amount of Exterian energies. Thus, those who self-identify as left-wing call Nazism "far-right", those who self-identify as right-wing call Nazism "far-left", those who self-identify as liberals or libertarians call Nazism "authoritarian", those who self-identify as centrists call Nazism "extremism" and so on. What one calls Nazism is among the best indicators of what one self-identifies as. Basically, if one says "Nazism is X", it's pretty much guaranteed that the one who uttered that sentence self-identifies as the extreme opposite of X. Interestingly, this also applies to religion: in order to discredit a particular view, one may declare that the Nazis were: atheists, Christians, or "pagans", depending on which view one wants to discredit. Of course, "Exterius" goes beyond the simplistic left-right spectrum that is popular on social media in the 2010's and 2020's. It affects religion, and many other things, and has affected people for millennia. "Exterius", simply put, is a catch-all term for anyone who is different from oneself. Out-group homogeneity (seeing the out-group as "more or less all the same") plays a huge factor in this. For the Christians, Exterius is the term "pagan" (which, at least originally, meant "anyone who is not Christian"), for the Ancient Greeks it was "barbarian" and so on. Here is a tentative list of some groups of people, followed by what they call Exterius (the terms for the Exterius I'll give may be nouns or adjectives, doesn't matter):
Ancient Greeks/Romans: Barbarian
Christians: Pagan, Satanists, Satanic, sinner, disbeliever, infidel etc.
Muslims: kafir (disbeliever), kufr (disbelief), shirk (polytheism), mushrik (polytheist), haram etc.
Psychiatrists: mentally ill, mental illness, mental disorder etc.
Nazis: Jews (yes, even when one is indeed not Jewish, and this happens even in modern times from people who follow vaguely similar ideologies)
Jews: gentiles, goyim
Left-wingers: far-right
Right-wingers: far-left, "woke" etc.
Centrists: extremism
Anarchists: statism
Capitalists: socialism
Socialists: capitalism
Liberal: authoritarian
Neo-Pagans: (not always, but often) Christianity, Satanism, "latent Christianity" etc. (the claim of some Neo-Pagans that "Pagans don't worship Satan, that's what Christians do" is IMHO one of the most mindblowing instances of a situation Exterius manifests)
Vegans: Carnists, Corpse Eaters, Animal Abusers etc. (the interesting thing to note is that these insults are sometimes used against vegetarians, who do not eat meat... this seems to provide more evidence in favor of the idea that "catch-all out-group terms" are so broad to encompass literally anyone who is different from oneself, making these terms highly inaccurate yet highly loaded in affective/emotional undertones).
Omnivores(???): (I need to do more research about this one)
[insert nationality]: foreigners
---I may add others as soon as they come to my mind
Note that I'm not saying here that all people in those groups use those words in that way, I'm just saying it's a relatively frequent phenomenon, and for certain groups of people, Exterius may be known by certain names. Note that this is one specific interpretation of what goes on when someone uses a catch-all out-group term onto someone else. Keeping with the relativistic spirit of the philosophy section of this website, I'll eventually also offer various kinds of other interpretations, psychological, sociological, theological, metaphysical, spiritual etc but those may be on separate pages. These other interpretations may or may not invoke abstract entities. For example a more naturalistic, psychological interpretation may focus on the fact that these are thought patterns happening in someone's mind, whereas an evolutionary psychology interpretation may focus on trying to explain why these thought patterns arise in the first place, seeking answers in ancient humans and primates. A theological interpretation may declare that these thought patterns are caused by God (or the gods/some gods/one god among many), or that these thoughts patterns are themselves divine entities (or emanations of one or more divine entities), or that we as humans are God (i.e. collectively, all humans are one God) or gods (i.e. individually, each human is a different deity). As always, the "same" thing can be interpreted in many ways.
In its most extreme form, Exterius is what is blamed for all of society's problems. For example, some people may say that "the Jews" are behind all of society's problems, others would blame "wokeness", or "capitalism", or "Neo-Marxism" (or something along those lines), or "political correctness", "patriarchy", "systemic racism", "fascism", "postmodernism", "globalism", "atheism", "Satan", "social media", "religion", "immigration", "individualism" etc. Basically, all problems in a society are identified with one single cause, and the meaning of the words used to refer to that cause are stretched so broadly that they pretty much refer to anyone or anything outside of one's own group, losing the original, more specific meaning. This can provide a very comforting narrative for an individual. It follows that Exterius, if anthropomorphized, is an evil entity, or at least an entity that appears evil to the observer, as well as a scapegoat. A form of monotheism declaring that Exterius is the only deity would be a form of dystheism (more on that eventually).
Antonym: Interius. Interius is what someone would call their "fellow in-group members".
1: Exterius does not exist at all and therefore it's not true that some people generalize and homogeneize all out-groups into one negative group.
2: Exterius exists only as an abstract concept and nothing more. No realm of ideas (it doesn't exist).
3: Exterius exists as an abstract concept, and like all abstract concepts, it's contained within a metaphysical realm of ideas
4: There is a metaphysical realm which contains some (but not all) ideas:
4.1: Exterius does not exist in that metaphysical realm
4.2: Exterius exists in that metaphysical realm
4.3: That metaphysical realm only contains ideas that are accepted by:
4.3.1: at least one individual (and therefore Exterius exists)
4.3.2: at least one subculture (how large that must be is subjective)
4.3.3: at least one mainstream culture in the world
4.3.4: it must be mainstream worldwide, or in most countries
4.3.5: it must be accepted by every individual... bar babies, people in coma etc.
4.3.6: it must even be accepted by babies and people who are in a coma or vegetative states, by everyone (and therefore Exterius does not exist)
5: Exterius exists in a metaphysical realm of ideas but also manifests itself in the real world: it manifests whenever one generalizes and homogeneizes all out-groups into one, negative group.
5.1: Exterius is not anthropomorphized: it has no human-like mind or intent.
5.2: Exterius is anthropomorphized: it's an evil entity that has some kind of nefarious intent against humankind. It can easily be conceptualized as a dragon/demon-like entity that instills fear and hatred in humans.
5.2.x: (anthropomorphized) Exterius and human beliefs
5.2.1: (Anexteriusism???) Exterius does not exist, regardless of human behavior.
5.2.2: Exterius ex hominibus: Exterius does not exist if humans do not homogeinize all out-groups negatively, it exist if humans do it. So, in at least one interpretation of #5.2.2, Exterius' existence is supported by certain psychic energies coming from humans. Thus, in some ways, humans have created Exterius, and may also be able to defeat Exterius if:
5.2.2.1: There exists at least one individual who does not homogeinize all out-groups negatively. Babies and people in coma do not do that, and therefore Exterius does not exist, and has never existed.
5.2.2.2: There exists at least one subculture who does not homogeinize all out-groups negatively.
5.2.2.3: There exists at least one mainstream subculture in the world who does not do that
5.2.2.4: It is uncommon worldwide to generalize all-outgroups like that.
5.2.2.5: Nobody generalizes like that
5.2.3: Potestas Exterioris ex hominibus: Exterius exists regardless of human beliefs, but it only has power (over humans and/or in general) if humans generalize all-out groups negatively (as for how many humans, look at #4.3.x). A possible interpretation is that Exterius gets its power from the psychic energies of humans, acting in some ways as a psychic vampire. When humans no longer generalize out-groups into one negative group, then Exterius still exists but becomes powerless to influence the lives of humans or to actively manifest to humans in this world.
5.2.4: Exterius Terrae ex hominibus: similar to 'potestas exterioris ex hominibus' in that humans categorizing out-groups into one negative groups change one of Exterius' characteristics, but here, instead of the amount of power, what changes is its 'location' so to speak - Exterius exists regardless of human beliefs, but when humans do not generalize like that, that deity remains in a metaphysical realm, unable to affect our world, whereas if humans generalize all out-groups into one bad group, then the psychic energies coming from humans act as a way to 'summon' Exterius into our world. The act of summoning Exterius may be intentional or accidental (or perhaps even something in-between). When humans stop generalizing in that way, Exterius leaves Earth and returns to the metaphysical realm, waiting to be summoned again. Exterius does not necessarily need to be 'summoned' by the entire society in order to be summoned, it can also be invoked by a small sub-culture, or even just an individual. Of course, in that case, Exterius is 'weaker' and has less control over our world or society, because of the lower amount of psychic energies that deity can use to empower itself. In that case, the area where Exterius manifests and the intensity of the manifestation is smaller compared to a situation where there is a widespread moral panic about anyone who does not belong to the in-group (of course, Exterius manifests itself more pervasively in monocultural/monoreligious and/or monoethnic countries, as it becomes easier to generalize about "outsiders" or "anticonformists" within that kind of societal structure).
5.2.5: Cognitio Exterioris ex hominibus: Exterius exists and has power over humans regardless of whether or not humans homogeinize out-groups, humans can only either be ignorant of Exterius and its power, or be aware of it. This, along with 'anexteriusism', is one of the two options (so far) where not only the existence of Exterius but its characteristics (e.g. power/location) as well does not change based on human behavior. Though, it is unclear what power may Exterius even have over humans if humans do not homogeneize all out-groups into one bad group.
6: Exterius as one deity among many
7: Exterius as the only deity that exists (a form of dystheism/monotheism)
7.1: Distinction between divine (Exterius: out-group) and profane (Interius: in-group). Divinity only exists in people, ideas and habits that belong to the "one bad out-group". Since those are considered bad and evil, divinity is also considered evil, making this a form of dystheism. The profane, that which is not sacred, is considered good and morally correct.