At a time when social turmoil seems to be increasing – having
experienced a violent weekend in the two localities in Texas and Ohio – how
people see things becomes one of those basic issues that can affect civic behavior
or the lack of it. It surely should be a
source of questions a civics teacher asks regularly and often.
Daniel
Kahneman[1] has done
a commendable job at not only dislodging commonly accepted notions concerning people’s
thinking and visualizing but has communicated effectively what shortcomings
those notions have wrought. This blog
cites Kahneman in two earlier postings.[2] In those postings, his reference to System 1
thinking – mostly reactive thinking and easy – and System 2 thinking – mostly
reflective thinking and tiring – are reviewed.
Here,
the aim is to be a bit more elemental. Early
in his cited book, Kahneman chooses to introduce this general area of interest
by providing a definition for a commonly used term that he defines in a more
restrictive way than how it is usually used.
The term is bias. This blogger
uses that term quite a bit in these postings.
Generally, this blogger utilizes it to indicate a leaning or a preferred
way to think of something usually in terms of making a choice between or among
options.
Kahneman
has a more targeted meaning in his use of the word. Here is his take:
Systemic
errors are known as biases, and they recur predictably in particular
circumstances. When the handsome and
confident speaker bounds onto the stage, for example, you can anticipate that
the audience will judge his comments more favorably than he deserves. The availability of a diagnostic label for
this bias – the halo effect – makes it easier to anticipate, recognize, and
understand.[3]
It’s not clear if the
handsome speaker does live up to or outperforms his pre-perceived performance;
is that still a bias? This writer thinks
so, but Kahneman’s point is that often one thinks in a certain way, but he/she
is not totally or even partially aware of why his/her thoughts project as they
do. One cause is bias.
So, one thing a civics teacher should
communicate to students is that their inner biases and other preconceived
notions operate usually silently and, as such, beyond the “in control” sense
many consciously believe they have over their thinking. “I know my own mind” can often be heard and
yet how much “knowing” takes place can be questioned and should be.
For example, people at any given
moment might think of a multitude of problems or issues as important or
urgent. Yet, the actual items they tend
to think of are those they find “easy” to think about. In turn, current topics of interest – the
ones one readily hears about, on say the media – easily pop up in their minds. They, the favored topics, become what is
important at that time and other important issues slip through without getting
the attention they desire.
The whole issue involving firearms and
dealing with mass shootings spur a lot of concern and determination while the
media reacts to the latest shooting. But
give it a few days or weeks, the media loses its interest on the issue, and
with that so does the average citizen loses the initial angst and his/her anger
dissipates. Afterall, thinking
reflectively about that or anything else is tiring.
And
to date, the sympathy level the victims engender – in one case, the Sandy Hook
Elementary School shooting with 26 school site victims, mostly small children –
has little to no effect on how long an intensity among the citizenry can be
maintained.
On this point, Kahneman writes, “In
turn, what the media choose to report corresponds to their view of what is
currently on the public’s mind. It is no
accident that authoritarian regimes exert substantial pressure on independent
media.”[4] Again, this mental operation manifests itself
in a hidden mode – how many say, “oh yes, I think that’s important because, and
only because, it took up half the news show last night”?
One reality that hides all this is
everyday experiences. Usually, a person
maintains his/her health and engages in behaviors considered appropriate in
given situations. That is, the person
exercises appropriate judgement most of the time. At any given moment, though, not much
reflection goes on; that is, one follows impressions and feelings. Why? Because
that person trusts his/her intuitive proclivities – in the form of beliefs and
preferences.
And
normal life – the life the individual to a large degree has arranged for
him/herself – supports those “biases.” But,
“[w]e are often confident even when we are wrong, and an objective observer is
more likely to detect our errors than we are.”[5] Can students think of a time when a friend (without
mentioning names) saw a situation – perhaps one that was important to that friend
– one way, but the student could plainly see that the friend was totally off
base?
And
the problem does not only affect observations or judgements by regular folks,
but it can also affect experts and how they see their field of knowledge. Kahneman reminds his readers that in any
specialty, the experts share certain assumptions. For example, social scientists, by and large,
use to and do share assumptions concerning human nature in their thinking. These biases can be so ingrained they don’t even
deserve mention. Kahneman cites two
examples.
One,
in line with what he is pointing out, as recent as the 1970s,[6]
the assumption was that regular folks are generally rational in their thoughts
and, therefore, they make sound, reasonable decisions. And two, since they are reasonable,
heightened emotions, such as fear or hatred or heightened fondness, account for
those other decisions that are not reasonable or are irrational. Led by such experts, such as Kahneman, and
their research, these biases are no longer excepted, at least, not in a
simplistic fashion.
Students
benefit from questioning their own thinking, whether it is everyday thinking or
the “this is important” type of thinking.
What this blog would hope is that such questioning by teachers would
lead to an understanding that one needs others – the objective observers – to
point out when one engages in the inevitable misdirected biases. Of course, that predisposes the person has a
bias to listen and consider and judge what he/she is being told.
Humans
live in a nuanced world and part of getting a handle on it – a handle that is
more likely to prove effective and rewarding – is to be able to detect and deal
with those nuances. Part of that ability
hinges on seeking, considering, and judging what oneself and others have to say
about one’s thoughts as well as one’s actions.
[2] See “The Structure and Processes of the Mind,” August 30,
2016, and “The Structure and Processes of the Mind (cont.),” September 1,
2016. Their URLs are https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-structure-and-processes-of-mind.html AND https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-structure-and-processes-of-mind-cont.html respectively.
[4] Ibid., 8
(Kindle edition).
[5] Ibid., 4
(Kindle edition).
No comments:
Post a Comment