flaws and fallacies

So recently I started reading this nonfiction book (that you may have heard of as it's been popular as of recent years - how I heard of it I don't remember) called Thinking, Fast and Slow. It's a pretty fascinating take on the psychology behind the mental processes we use to make decisions in everyday life, which the author, Daniel Kahneman, characterizes as two agents or systems. System 1, the fast thinker, is prone to make automatic judgments without you realizing it and falls along the lines of what most people would call intuition, whereas System 2, the slow thinker, is more deliberate and takes effect when you're actually conscious of what you're thinking about. Most people regularly rely on both systems on an everyday basis in decision-making, but often don't realize how often their System 1 factors into that process, particularly when it leads them to faulty or irrational conclusions that they might not have otherwise if they'd actually employed their System 2 more.

The book itself spends a good deal of time elaborating on other mental/logical fallacies that often emerge as a result of both systems and their interaction with each other. A lot of it may come across as surprising, though perhaps less so particularly if you're already familiar with statistics/probability, as a good number of fallacies are related to that subject and how often people will ignore statistical conclusions even when they've been convinced of their validity in favor of continuing to satisfy their own personal biases (but what else is new, really). I could go on about it more but I'll leave it at it's a pretty enlightening read so go read it and yada yada.

About a month ago it was suggested to me that I'd been giving off this impression as if I were fed up with incompetence in the world (not sure if that was the exact word but it was along those lines) To be honest, I hadn't really thought of it that way before, but my immediate reaction was of spontaneous immediate agreement- I mean seriously, why is there so much incompetence in the world?- while neglecting to mention the second half of what I was really feeling- "and why do I feel like I'm just contributing to it?"

The flaws and mental fallacies that Kahneman brought up in his book struck a similar chord along that train of thought, for I couldn't help but feel incredibly annoyed and moreover pissed off while reading about them. Defects coming from people who essentially were unwilling to admit their own mistakes, satisfied with continuing to live in a fantasy world that catered to their own preconceived beliefs and immediate experiences, while rewriting other contrary facts and findings in their own minds so that it could fit whatever bullshit yet coherent story or interpretation that they came up with in their heads. (Okay, I'll admit that's a rather pessimistic way of interpreting Kahneman's book thus far.) Even though these are flaws that pretty much EVERYONE is susceptible to at some point in their lives or even regularly... but that notion just frustrated me even further.

We live such messed up, imperfect lives, it's a wonder we're able to still live and marvel at the simplest things, the beautiful (and not-so-beautiful) things, and get by day-to-day as if our lives aren't... really so imperfect. I look at all of the evidence I've been coming across of the ways in which people and the world around them don't entirely function the way that they should... the way that they ought to... the way that they feel like they should or ought to... and it just brings about an overwhelming sense of confusion and disbelief. To look at a problem in the world today and have this sense that this didn't have to happen; if only people actually communicated and empathized with each other and tried to focus on something beyond themselves for once, looked at the bigger picture, examined their own thoughts and motivations and actions and took responsibility for their own mistakes and shortcomings. But one can only hope for so much sometimes from a selfish and (to use a term parents mentioned from the weekend) "stiff-necked" species, in which these faults are almost essentially programmed from birth. There's no avoiding it.

And to see some of these same glaring defects in my own self on a regular basis, and find myself starting to grow apathetic about it because I too have that innately selfish part of me that doesn't really want to give a shit about it anymore. I see how I'm also a part of the problem I complain about, but I'm paralyzed by my own self-centered desire to settle for the status quo, a hedonistic life focused on the day-to-day to maybe even the next few months that doesn't have to worry about the long term plan because it's tired of people asking "when are you going to get a _____" (insert topic of choice here) and "what do you really want to achieve with your life?" I mean, I'm still too mentally busy being hung up on "why is this world the way it is?" and "what if that question doesn't have a real answer?" when I'm conscious enough to be bothered by it.

...

Anyone reading this who's been in or around an Intervarsity-related community is probably familiar with a book called True Story, which often gets recommended as a summer read in those circles due to its accessible message regarding how to reach out to others in a society that is becoming increasingly hostile to [the largely Protestant evangelical brand of] Christianity itself, which makes it pretty relevant application-wise. The book espouses a 4 circle diagram intended as a more sophisticated update to the bridge diagram that I'm guessing most evangelical Christians have probably been exposed to at some point in their lives (in my case it was elementary school), and I've personally seen two different communities that both happened to set up trainings of some sort teaching people how to engage others using the 4 circle diagram- aka how to draw it from scratch.

The diagram itself is nice in that it provides a structured way of explaining the basic idea of the Christian worldview to anyone who isn't familiar with it or perhaps even has a misconception of what it is Christians actually believe and why they would believe it. But as with any diagram or model that people come up with, it doesn't quite suffice as a satisfactory answer to all of the questions an outsider might have, particularly anyone who's given serious thought to this. (from a logic standpoint, I imagine one might take issue with the claim, "Just like hunger points to food and thirst points to water, so our universal ache for a better world means that such a world either once existed or will one day exist.") And I'm not entirely sure whether it suffices for the believer sharing the message itself- it probably varies on how much or well that person already understands their own faith and its implications. But the impression I got from seeing the enthusiastic push to have this diagram taught and spread in both communities was that people are willing to settle for a story that makes sense to them, even if it doesn't fit with or capture some or all of the details. And that isn't just limited to Christian circles either; I'm pretty sure that's applicable to everyone at some point.

And that happens to be the same message that Thinking Fast, and Slow expresses: our tendency to create stories in our heads that satisfy both the evidence we see before us and our own direct, personal experiences, when oftentimes there just isn't really enough information to form a realistic or universally accurate impression of that sort. And then we judge the validity of the stories we create by how coherent they are in themselves rather than how well they address all of those details, finding it easier instead to ignore the small things that don't conform to the story we're satisfied with, if needed.

To be honest, I often feel the same way about the Christian story itself. It can be told well, and it is internally coherent enough to satisfy at least some of those people who are feeling empty about their lives, upset by life circumstances and the failings of their own nature. The gospel is meant to be a message that saves, to preach good news to the poor and proclaim liberty to the captives, and recover sight to the blind and set free those who are oppressed. It's really an uplifting story. But to really accept it, to accept the Bible in the form which it's been presented, one has to learn to cope with a lot of added baggage: internal contradictions, flaws and fallacies, persecution and injustice borne about both outside and within, and often because of the church, established denominations divided among themselves in the most basic of doctrines and subject to bureaucratic powers, all of which came about as the result of human error and wrongdoing and misguided and often ill-informed intentions. For God so loved the world that he evidently chose a selfish, stubborn, prone to error and ultimately imperfect human species to help carry out his will upon the earth, presumably fully knowing of the consequences that would entail.

People in the communities I've been a part of are prone to look at those outside as lost, as misguided, as being without hope, and while that line of thinking does seem to naturally follow from the story that has been presented, it has never really sat right with me. Who are we to judge other lifestyles, other beliefs and worldviews, other experiences, and other existences in that fashion if we haven't experienced the weight of those lives ourselves? And yet we act as though our intuition based solely on our own immediate experiences about these issues is enough, in some cases perhaps without even realizing it.

Dear God, this is what I mean when I tell you that I'm not satisfied... but I'm still hoping to be surprised.