Hello everyone and welcome back. I’m your host Kevin browne and in this episode, I want to talk about being wrong. It’s not something anyone likes and it’s probably something you avoid. Actually, if researchers are right about this, you probably think you don’t have this problem. As the Ian Leslie quote, I referenced in the last episode stated if you’re like most people you go around thinking you know everything. Don’t feel too bad about this because everyone feels this way. You might say it’s our natural feeling about our opinions and beliefs. And, as you can probably guess, I’m going to show that it’s wrong.
But, let me start by asking the question that Kathryn Schulz asks in her TED talk. Schulz describes herself as a “wrongologist” and has written an interesting book on the subject titled Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error. In her TED talk she addresses a small group on stage with her by asking them: How does it feel, emotionally, to be wrong? She gets some fairly predictable answers: dreadful. Embarrassing. You probably feel the same way. But, here’s the payoff. Those are not answers to the question How does it feel to be wrong? Those are answers to the question How does it feel to realize you’re wrong? What does it feel like to be wrong? It doesn’t feel like anything. Or to put it better, it feels just like being right. This is what’s so tricky about being wrong and doing something about it. It’s not easy to distinguish being right from being wrong by reflecting on your own feelings. Like you, I have a lot of beliefs about a lot of different things. Just like you, I’m not infallible. That means that you and I are currently holding beliefs that are right. We are also holding beliefs that are wrong. We have to be. there are so many things we all think about and form opinions and beliefs about. And, they can’t all be accurate! But, they all feel accurate. They all feel the same. As Schulz puts it, “this internal sense of rightness that we all experience so often is not a reliable guide to what is actually going on in the external world.” For many people, this is a major shock. Everything about how we perceive the world around us and what we believe feels accurate. But, it isn’t. It can’t be unless we are infallible which none of us are. So what can we do? Well, unfortunately, the most common response to this problem is denial. It’s easy to deny that there is any problem at all. My beliefs are right because I’ve researched them and thought about them and come to the conclusion that they are all well-founded. Of course, no one else does this. But, I do. This is what psychologists call the fundamental attribution bias. We tend to think that we’ve arrived at our beliefs through a process of reason and reflection on the evidence. Others don’t do this, they just rely on emotion and poor thinking. Of course, this can’t be correct either. In reality, we all arrive at our views in roughly the same way. As Marc Penn puts it in his book Microtrends most people get their news from highly unreliable sources including various websites, chats with friends, the occasional news show, and "their own gut." That means, surprisingly, that "most people end up being wrong much of the time about what is actually going on." So, what do we need to do to gain a more accurate perspective? The first thing we need to do is acknowledge that we have opinions and beliefs that are wrong. That simple acknowledgment opens the door for the next step. But, acknowledgment is important. We have to really come to terms with the fact that we hold views that are wrong. We may not know, yet, which views those are, but we have to face up to the fact that some of our views are entirely wrong and many of our views are probably partially wrong. Then what? Well, the process will be the same for whichever belief or opinion we investigate so pick one to start with. The next step will likely be unpleasant in the extreme. But, it is necessary. Go looking for evidence that shows that your belief is wrong. Set out to disprove the belief. As the philosopher of science, Karl Popper advised, attempt to falsify your belief. Think of it as a stress test of your belief. Right now your unexamined belief is fragile. Granted it doesn’t feel that way, but it is. When you work to falsify it you are actually working to strengthen your overall view of the world. As Julia Galef, whom I mentioned in the previous episode put it, you are working to improve the accuracy of your map of the world. As you look for this evidence be sure to look for the most credible sources you can find. Don’t look for evidence that your own belief is wrong by going to the sources that tend to confirm your original belief is correct. They will probably not provide the strongest arguments against that belief. They may refer to arguments against but only to show they are weak and not worth bothering about. In order to really stress test your ideas, you want to subject them to the strongest examination possible. That means looking at the best arguments against them you can find. What do you do with those arguments and evidence once you find them? Take them seriously. Really learn about them. Spend some time with them. Imagine that these are the basis for your own belief. What does that feel like? Your initial reaction to this exercise might have been that you couldn’t imagine doing this because the beliefs of those who disagree with you are motivated by misinformation, lack of compassion, or worse, evil itself. If you look at our current public discourse on any given issue, it’s easy to find people who talk about the other side in just these terms. So you might think you’re betraying your side of the issue or your core principles. What you need to do to address this very real concern is to personalize this process. You probably know someone who holds beliefs on the issue you’re examining that are the opposite of yours. They may be a coworker, acquaintance, neighbor, or even a friend. You should consider the advice Elizabeth Lesser offers in her TEd talk titled Take the other to lunch. When you take them to lunch state upfront that you want to talk about an issue you disagree about but you want to do this in a specific way. Agree to some rules up front such as “Don’t persuade, defend, or interrupt. Be curious, be conversational, be real, and listen.” In the course of your lunch, Lesser advises that you each ask three questions: Share some of your life experiences with me. what issues deeply concern you? And What have you always wanted to ask someone from the other side? The point of this exercise is not necessarily to change your position although that could happen. The point is to gain an understanding of someone else’s point of view that goes beyond the superficial characterizations you hear from opponents of that view. The point is to really connect with someone who holds different views. Imagine what our public discourse could be if more people did this. In fact, more people used to do just that. Unfortunately, we’ve gotten very good at sorting ourselves into groups where we’re only exposed to ideas we agree with. If we are exposed to other ideas it is through the biased filter of our own view. Social media has made this self-selection process even easier and so we all to some degree or other live in our own echo chambers. Consider the possibility that you’re missing out on something important by staying in those echo chambers. Consider the possibility that the feeling you have of being right is just like the feeling of being wrong. There’s no way to tell the difference until you do a little digging. You might be pleasantly surprised by what you find. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, please subscribe to this podcast and visit me online at kevinjbrowne.com. Thank you for listening and I’ll see you on the next episode.
0 Comments
The world around us is very complicated. But, while we tend to recognize this fact when prompted we routinely ignore it when it comes to expressing our own opinions. We tend to recognize the limits of other people’s knowledge while failing to recognize our limits. We all suffer from what Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach refer to in their book The Knowledge Illusion as the illusion of explanatory depth.
Consider the following example from their book:
If you’re like most people, you rated your understanding of question 1 as very high. But, if you’re like most of those people you discovered in step two that you were virtually incapable of explaining in any sort of detail how a zipper actually worked. This is the knowledge illusion. As they point out in the book, “Our point is not that people are ignorant. It’s that people are more ignorant than they think they are. We all suffer, to a greater or lesser extent, from an illusion of understanding, an illusion that we understand how things work when in fact our understanding is meager.” Please understand that I’m not sharing this with you to make you feel bad. I’m sharing this to point out a crucial insight that will help you deal with real-world issues and to encourage you to cultivate an important critical thinking disposition: intellectual humility. What does any of this have to do with real-world issues? Well, take the example above about the zipper. Now, instead of asking about how a zipper works, substitute some political, ethical, or moral issues: abortion, capital punishment, immigration, cloning, climate change, etc. See the problem? If you’re like most people, you have an opinion on these issues. You think your opinion is well-founded and backed up with knowledge and facts. You’re also suffering from the illusion of explanatory depth. You think your knowledge of the issue is deeper than it really is. Don’t believe me. Try it. Consider the contentious issue of abortion. Set aside your position on abortion for a moment and consider just how much you know about this issue. What are the three most important Supreme Court rulings on abortion? What is the central argument in Roe v. Wade and what does it specifically imply about abortions? What percentage of women each year who become pregnant have an abortion? What is the breakdown in terms of trimesters for abortion? How many in each trimester? What laws are states able to pass regarding abortion? What are the central philosophical arguments relevant to this issue? Are you able to answer each of these questions in sufficient detail? And these are just a few of the questions you’d need to answer to claim you have a depth of knowledge on the abortion issue. If you are unable to answer these questions, then what exactly is your stance on abortion (whatever it is) based on? Now, consider all of the other ethical and moral issues we could consider in this way. Each one entails a depth of knowledge that most people do not have. But, most of those people have strong opinions on each of those issues. So, what should we do about this problem? There are several options to consider. 1. Start now and learn as much as you can about all of these issues. The trouble here, of course, is that you simply don’t have enough time to do this. No one does. There’s too much to master and too little time. 2. Continue to do what you’ve always done. Have your opinions and express them. What difference does it make if you know or not? It’s what you feel about these issues that matters. The problem here is that it does make a difference. What if you’re wrong and your push for a solution to the issue is a push towards action that just makes things worse. 3. Drop out of the game altogether. Don’t have opinions and if you do have them, don’t express them. Don’t participate in civic life. Don’t vote. The problem with this choice is that we need people to participate in civil society. In a participatory democracy, a representative republic, we need people to vote, advocate, inquire, and be a check on politicians. People need to be able to hold their representatives accountable for their actions. 4. Cultivate intellectual humility. Learn what you can but recognize that you won’t be able to be an expert on all of these issues. Also, recognize that you share the same problem with everyone else. Encourage others to see that the limits of your knowledge are the same as the limits of their knowledge. As Julia Galef advocates in her book The Scout Mindset, hold your beliefs lightly. Don’t be so sure of your own beliefs that you can’t or won’t listen to others. Be a person that works for dialog and discussion. See the common ground between you and those who hold different opinions. Of course, you can express your opinions and argue for them passionately. But, be prepared and open to seeing other views and seriously consider them as well. Another perspective on this is offered by Adam Grant in his book Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don’t Know, where he says: “Who you are should be a question of what you value, not what you believe. Values are your core principles in life–they might be excellence and generosity, freedom and fairness, or security and integrity. Basing your identity on these kinds of principles enables you to remain open-minded about the best ways to advance them. You want the doctor whose identity is protecting health, the teacher whose identity is helping students learn, and the police chief whose identity is promoting safety and justice. When they define themselves by values rather than opinion, they buy themselves the flexibility to update their practices in light of new evidence.” Given that we all suffer to one degree or another from the knowledge illusion, that means that all of us could update our knowledge. When we do so, we should also update our beliefs in light of this new evidence. Will we? Sloman and Ferbach’s book The Knowledge Illusion is subtitled Why we Never Think Alone. I think this provides another useful insights into how we should go about discussing contentious issues. Instead of being an advocate for a position where you defend that position against objections we need to try to engage in a cooperative investigation where we try to figure out together what is really going on and what the best course of action would be to solve problems. That’s also what Julia Galef means by her example of the scout mindset. She contrasts this with what she calls the soldier mindset. Cultivating a scout mindset requires intellectual humility. You can’t be so sure of your ideas that you’re unable to admit to being wrong. I’m going to talk more about being wrong in a future episode. For now I’ll leave you with this thought from the knowledge illusion book. Sloman and Ferbach point out that “It’s remarkably easy to disabuse people of their illusion, you merely have to ask them for an explanation.” Doing this for a simple item like a zipper makes people more open to admitting they don’t know as much as they think they know about larger more contentious issues. And, that makes it much easier to engage in a useful dialogue instead of a heated argument. Isn’t that what we want? Isn’t that what we need? If you enjoyed this episode please subscribe and visit me online at kevinjbrowne.com. Thanks for listening and I’ll see you on the next episode. Hello everyone and welcome to “Improve Your Thinking.” I’m your host Kevin Browne and I want to help you improve your thinking. How can I help? Well, I’ve been teaching courses in philosophy, logic, and critical thinking for over 25 years and in that time I’ve gained a lot of useful insights that I’m excited to share with you.
In addition to teaching philosophy, I am also a certified philosophical counselor. What does that mean? Basically, it means I use philosophy to help people in very practical ways. As the philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein said in his book Philosophical Investigations, “A philosophical problem has the form: "I don't know my way around.” So many problems in life are just like that. We just don’t know our way around. We don’t know what to do or sometimes even how to figure out what options are available. How can philosophy help you find your way around? One way is by using a set of tools for clear thinking called logic or critical thinking and in these podcasts, I’m going to share some of those tools with you and show you how to use them. Another useful technique is simply asking questions. But, not just any questions. Philosophers tend to ask questions that seem obvious on the surface. Socrates was famous for asking such questions and people often had the same reaction to his questions: We already know the answer to that! But, as his questioning showed, we often don’t already know the answer to these seemingly simple questions like What is good? What is beauty? What is justice? We assume we know and based on that assumption we take action. And those actions often lead to problems. This is where philosophy can help. So, we’ll be asking questions and doing some critical thinking. Along the way, I’ll also be sharing some interesting insights from various books I’ve read. Don’t worry I’m not going to be giving boring philosophy lectures about abstract philosophical texts that no one understands. No, I’m going to be sharing insights that will be surprising, startling, and maybe even frustrating to hear. But, they will all be ideas you can use to improve your thinking. From time to time, I’ll also be sharing answers I’ve written to questions posted on the Quora website. I’m also hoping to answer some of your questions as well so feel free to send them along. My daughter once asked me whether I had a motto. I forget what we were talking about that made her think to ask but in fact I do. I use it in my philosophy courses. To think like a philosopher I believe you need to do three things: Ask more questions. Demand better answers. Learn more than you think you need to know. In my experience as a teacher, I have found that students do not ask enough questions. That’s true of people outside of school as well. Be more curious about what’s going on and why. Ask questions like: Why are we doing things this way? Is there a better way? When you are talking with someone whose views are different from yours don’t respond by pointing out how and why they’re wrong. Ask questions to find out what they’re thinking and why. In addition to asking more questions, we also need to demand better answers. This is especially true of our elected officials and others in authority. Too often we accept an answer because it is what we want to hear. it’s what we already agree with. Because of something called the confirmation bias we tend to accept things at face value if we already agree with them. Instead, we need to keep digging, ask more questions, and demand better answers. Don’t be satisfied with the answer you want to hear. Instead, take the time to figure out whether that answer is the most accurate answer. And finally, we all need to learn more than we think we need to know. It’s easy to react to a new idea or unfamiliar subject by saying “I don’t need to know that.” Instead, what if we adopted the perspective that there might be something interesting and useful there to learn. There are things I think I need to know and I learn about them. But, there are also things I don’t think I need to know. As a result, I don’t bother to learn about them. But, what if I’m wrong. What if there are useful insights to be gained that I’m missing out on. I used to think I didn’t need to know about psychology. Turns out I was wrong about that. So much of what I teach in my logic and critical thinking courses is psychological. You can’t really understand what good critical thinking is without understanding some psychology. Of course, you can’t learn everything about everything. But, you can remain open-minded about your learning. And stay curious. But, as Ian Leslie points out in his book titled Curious, "to feel curious, you have to be aware of a gap in your knowledge in the first place. The trouble is, most of us, most of the time, go around thinking we know everything." So, it’s good to remember Wittgenstein’s point: A philosophical problem has the form: "I don't know my way around.” Or to shorten it: I don’t know. So, join me weekly as we explore ideas and ask more questions, demand better answers, and learn more than we think we need to know. If you like the sound of this please subscribe to this weekly podcast and visit me online at kevinjbrowne.com. Thank you for listening and I’ll see you on the next episode! |
kevin j. brownePhilosopher | Educator Archives
July 2022
improve your thinking: The course |