Don’t confuse me with the facts ….

Nicholas Kristof writes in today’s NY Times about how bias can affect perception:

Psychologists showed a film clip of the football game to groups of students at each college and asked them to act as unbiased referees and note every instance of cheating. The results were striking. Each group, watching the same clip, was convinced that the other side had cheated worse — and this was not deliberate bias or just for show.

“Their eyes were taking in the same game, but their brains seemed to be processing the events in two distinct ways,” Farhad Manjoo writes in his terrific new book, “True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society.” It’s the best political book so far this year.

The title of the cited book is certainly intriguing; I’ll have to look into it.

Kristof continues:

Mr. Manjoo cites a more recent study by Stanford University psychologists of students who either favored or opposed capital punishment. The students were shown the same two studies: one suggested that executions have a deterrent effect that reduces subsequent murders, and the other doubted that.

Whatever their stance, the students found the study that supported their position to be well-conducted and persuasive and the other one to be profoundly flawed.

“That led to a funny result,” Mr. Manjoo writes. “People in the study became polarized.”

A fair reading of the two studies might have led the students to question whether any strong conclusions could be drawn about deterrence, and thus to tone down their views on the death penalty.  But the opposite happened. Students on each side accepted the evidence that conformed to their original views while rejecting the contrary evidence — and so afterward students on both sides were more passionate and confident than ever of their views.

In other words, don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s already made up. Hmm… that sounds like some of the religious folks I know ….

You might think that people would have this tendency no matter what their ideology. And you would be wrong:

This resistance to information that doesn’t mesh with our preconceived beliefs afflicts both liberals and conservatives, but a raft of studies shows that it is a particular problem with conservatives. For example, when voters receive mailings offering them free pamphlets on various political topics, liberals show some interest in getting conservative views. In contrast, conservatives seek only those pamphlets that echo their own views.

Likewise, liberal blogs overwhelmingly link to other liberal blogs or news sources. But with conservative blogs, the tendency is much more pronounced; it is almost a sealed universe.

I’ve been a lifelong Republican, going back to elementary school, when I wanted to put a Goldwater sticker on my parents’ car (they said no).

Lately, though, I’ve been thinking of myself as an independent, for reasons more or less along the lines Kristof describes. Fidelity to the First Commandment calls for us to face the facts; too many of today’s so-called conservatives aren’t willing to do that.

Comments

7 responses to “Don’t confuse me with the facts ….”

  1. Harry Celine Avatar
    Harry Celine

    Conservatives get plenty of liberal information from the mainstream media. They don’t need to special order it. Conservative information is harder to come by.
    For instance, how often do you hear the data which contradicts global warming?
    (Personally, I am agnostic on this particular subject. I don’t intend to discuss it. It is just a good example.)

  2.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    I get this type of reaction all the time on the topic of Jesus’ resurrection. When someone gets offended that I’m undecided on the subject, I ask if they’ve ever read the gospel resurrection accounts side-by-side, and noted the inconsistencies.
    Invariably they haven’t, and they always reject my request to try the exercise. Mind’s already settled, no need confusing it with what the bible actually says.

  3. Larry Avatar
    Larry

    “This resistance to information that doesn’t mesh with our preconceived beliefs afflicts both liberals and conservatives, but a raft of studies shows that it is a particular problem with conservatives. For example, when voters receive mailings offering them free pamphlets on various political topics, liberals show some interest in getting conservative views. In contrast, conservatives seek only those pamphlets that echo their own views.”
    I’d take these “studies” with a grain of salt. Very often they are shown to be faulty due to the biases of those who authored it. Manjoo is suspect as he is a liberal writer for Salon, so its no wonder he would cite these “studies”.
    “Likewise, liberal blogs overwhelmingly link to other liberal blogs or news sources. But with conservative blogs, the tendency is much more pronounced; it is almost a sealed universe.”
    Thats just nonsense. HOW is it “much more pronounced”? Whats the difference between liberal blogs “overwhelmingly” linking to other liberal blogs or sites and conservative blogs doing the same? There are many conservative blogs/sites that link to liberal sites/blogs all the time!

  4. Harry Celine Avatar
    Harry Celine

    Yes Larry, liberals are afflicted with the selective filtering problem to at least as great an extent as anyone else. I doubt D.C. even looked at the sidebars of conservative blogs (e.g. T19) before he wrote that statement about links.
    Our anonymous friend who complained about gospel inconsistencies has never heard of the school of “Gospel Harmonization” which (tries to) explain these inconsistencies.
    I used to dabble in it myself. Now, when people bring up inconsistencies and contradictions, I just ask them:
    “How many shooters were there in Dealy Plaza?”
    In the 19th C., many forgeries of Greek and Roman art were declared genuine by leading experts which are now obviously the work of 19th C. forgers. They display obvious stylistic elements of that time period.
    The lesson here is that “one’s own style is invisible.”

  5.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    Harry, if more conservative blogs were like T19, we’d have less acrimony.
    * * *
    As to Dealey Plaza, Harry, you and countless others are missing a key point: No one who thinks there were multiple shooters is asking us to radically reorient our lives as a result.

  6. Harry Avatar
    Harry

    D.C.
    I just wish that you and countless others would just say “I don’t believe that the dead are ever resurrected because it is contrary to the laws of physics” rather than pretending that you disbelief hinges on an inconsistency in reports on the numbers of angels seen at the empty tomb.

  7.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    Harry, I don’t think we know enough to warrant reorienting our lives around the claim that Jesus was raised. But neither am I willing to make such a firm statement to the contrary as you propose.
    There’s no call for me to say “I don’t believe the dead are ever resurrected because it is contrary to the laws of physics” (emphasis added). Few if any scientists would be so categorical; nearly all would say something like, we aren’t now prepared to accept and act on the claim that dead people are resurrected, because (1) the claim appears to be contrary to the laws of physics as we currently understand them, and (2) the evidence in support of the claim isn’t so strong as to suggest our understanding is flawed on that point.
    Whatever happened in the tomb, happened. Unlike some, I’m not troubled by our lack of knowledge; agnosticism in the weak sense is perfectly OK on that score.
    * * *
    I talk a lot about need to face the facts. What I’m really saying is that the First Commandment implicitly calls us to deal as best we can with the reality that God wrought, as opposed to the “reality” that we conjure in our minds, often through wishful thinking.
    If the evidence as a whole were to persuade me that Jesus was raised, I’d try to govern my life accordingly. The evidence hasn’t so persuaded me.
    (The evidence as a whole includes the opinions of others, to which I give what I prayerfully deem to be due weight, but not conclusive weight.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *