Sunday, May 2, 2010

Quick to Characterize

If only we were omniscient.

As humans, it is our unfortunate lot to make decisions and judgments based on hopelessly incomplete information. This applies to almost every aspect of life. We form impressions about people who we don't really know, we develop political ideas without a full understanding of how our economic and political systems work, and we hold to moral models without really knowing how they might affect society at large.

People will disagree with what I just said. They'll say, "You are wrong, I think I understand how our economy works pretty well." Inevitably, these are laymen whose economic experience amounts to a couple college classes and a big dose of either naivete or arrogance. Sure, there are basics that come readily. But how closely do you think a linear supply and demand curve really approximates reality?

The fact is that we can't comprehend the millions of factors that affect economic growth. We can't access the information, and even if we could, we couldn't retain it. Similarly, we can't perceive all the inner motivations that compel people to do what they do.

So, out of sheer necessity we simplify. We develop models, approximations of reality that make comprehension and decision-making easier on us. It's like we are looking at the world through a lens that distorts everything. There isn't anything inherently wrong with this. The problem comes when we forget (or never even realize) that we are seeing the world through a lens that may or may not be giving us a correct picture. We forget to recognize our own fallibility, and then our ability to improve our understanding of the world decreases.

This behavior is often displayed when we assign labels to people. I have acquaintances and family members who do this very often. I hear them say things like, "Illegal immigrants are criminals," "Liberals are socialists," "so-and-so is a dumb-ass," "Muslims are terrorists," etc. Or I'll hear people categorize whole groups of people with dismissive statements: "tree-huggers," "environmentalist wackos," "bleeding hearts," "whores," etc. The list is endless. I am sure that I am often guilty of making similar statements.

This kind of blatant mis-characterization is inconsistent with the Christian religion, it is inconsistent with the scientific method, and it is damaging to society. If we really want to understand each-other, we should start by discarding our labels and admitting that we are fallible.

2 comments:

  1. I've had these same thoughts before. It's why I have a hard time choosing a political party - how on earth could I know enough of the variables to actually understand what's going on and actually believe one side or the other? I feel sometimes like we live these lives of ridiculous simplification.

    Just so you know, I have been reading your thoughts and I really appreciate you sharing them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm glad you enjoy it!

    I understand what you mean. Often, "independents" are criticized for not standing for anything, but I think that unless you devote a significant chunk of your life to politics, you will inevitably rely more on your prejudices than on reason.

    I'm usually selective about what I study in depth within politics. For example, I took the time to investigate health care reform since it was a big deal. But I don't particularly care whether the recent oil spill is bad for the Obama administration or not, and I don't care to find out.

    ReplyDelete