Pennsylvania Couple sees Jesus in their Christmas tree.
"The truth does not require your belief to exist."
In an age where truth is often the last consideration when deciding what to think, wanting certain things to be true and others to be false is replacing reason and logic as the way to think.
Arguably, the almost unbelievable advances made in the last century (as compared to any other century in the history of humanity, including this one) in material science; finance; pharmacology and medical advancement; racial, gender, and sexual equality; social philosophy; communications and computer technology, did not happen due to the power of wishful thinking. Rather, these developments were due to the clear minded examination of the problems to be solved, careful testing of different possible solutions, formulating new methods, retesting, modification and remodification of hypotheses, until results were good enough - true enough - to be used in practical ways. This is the scientific method, folks--a seemingly moss covered concept we learned about in high school and then promptly forgot about after graduation.
Essentially, like a quantitative limit can be approached in calculus, so can the hypothetically "self-evident" or so-called "absolute" truth be approached by finding things - what we take to be "facts" - that are true enough, and then employing them to foster positive effects in the real world. While the difference between truth and facts has been much debated and usually settled upon by mere subjective interpretation, we should at least be able to agree upon the objective aspects that maintain philosophical common ground. But we don't agree. And this is getting worse.
The great thing about science - at least when scientists are honestly motivated to discover things that are truer and truer - is that the scientist actually gets points for admitting errors in theory. His/her colleagues may be biased by professional pride, attempting to discredit said theory. But, dignity and respect is instantly reafforded when the scrutinized theorist humbly bows to the weight of superior evidence. And in that way, the entire field is advanced. After all, what is the use of spending precious resources, energy, and time trying to build upon flawed conclusions; on pretending the disproved theory must somehow be true, just because one wishes it were? This can lead to, ha-hem, "alternative facts."
In this way science holds up Shinola. While on the other hand, wishful thinking just leaves one holding shit. Unlike science, wishful thinkers are only given credit by their similarly-minded peers for never disagreeing. Those who point out flaws are kicked out the door as heretics. Socialized religion is the most obvious place where this is seen. But the same can be said for more and more institutions.
Political platforms are especially poisonous. In politics, ideology requires the adoption of things one may not believe in, for the maintenance of a "common front." This retarded requirement is not actually the key to unity. Instead, it is the key to the appearance of unity. And, instead of dusting off the scientific method, most people are more satisfied with taking things euphemistically at their "face value." When I refer to ideology, I am referring to the specific and rigid belief system of some other human, not to the wrongly attributed, "study of ideas." Adopting another person's belief system - ideology - as closely as one can, rather than using bits and pieces that work while throwing out those that don't, is intellectually lazy and indicates a desire for the narcotic influence of willful ignorance over seeking truth. I mean the term "willful ignorance" very literally.
Most people are not critical thinkers. They have been trained like animals to assume that someone smarter has already come up with all the answers to that individual's personal existential questions. However, ideology and habit (both of which I will address more fully in future chapters) is the most destructive force to the liberty of thinking what one chooses to think (aka cognitive liberty). Notice I didn't say, "...what one wishes to think." If ideology is a poison to cognitive liberty, wishful thinking is the container within which that poison is carried.
There are many ways in which the deception that results from encouraging wishful thinking manifests itself. But for simplicity sake, let's look at three major permutations...
1. Self Deception - This is the classic condition that I am mostly referring to in this chapter. It results from wanting the world to be a certain way, in the face of more substantial evidence to the contrary. It is a mostly innocent condition that most of us have experienced at some point. It's placebo effect can sometimes erroneously confirm one's naive notions, which makes it especially problematic. Yet, this is not irreversible. If fact, one can move beyond it by simply choosing to research any aspect that may ring untrue. This is difficult at first, but can be easier with each conceptual error that is revealed to be such.
A good example, in my mind at least, is The Case of the Lens Flares. I have a friend who is a very sweet, gentle and positively inclined human being. She does not strike me as overly well educated, yet is still very intelligent. Anyway, she recently posted a selfie with a group of friends that had small colored dots near their feet circled afterward with a hand drawn red line. The caption read something like, "OMG, look what the spirit of Jesus left for us!"
Being my characteristically feisty self, I commented, "Or... maybe just a lens flare?"
Understandably, incredulity took her over--be it subtly expressed, and she replied with a dozen angel, heart, and peace sign emojis, that "No! I click pics all the time at this place and this has never happened before! It's a miracle!"
I couldn't help myself. I basically replied with, "What do you think is more likely, that Jesus - a man/god so powerful he turned water into wine, raised his best friend from the dead, and was able to resurrect himself, while pouring out the Spirit of Truth upon all humanity - decided to further manifest his glory by placing colored dots on your selfie?...or that they are just lens flares?" Eventually, I did the right thing and apologized for questioning her beliefs. But a good example, it does make, Yoda might say.
2. Accepted Deception - This is a bit more subtle, and slightly more dangerous. Wishful thinking, when one actually suspects it might be in error is a self-feeding process that employs stubborn pride for self-sustenance. People will sometimes hold onto this until philosophically cornered. Even then they will not admit to their error. Yet, often, their inner sense of right and wrong - their conscience? - will prevail. And, slowly they will alter their wishful expressions with a more and more updated version of their beliefs (something more closely resembling the truth) until they have completely done an about face. It is a saving of face.
A rather weak example can be seen when a person is changing his/her mind about social issues. Pro Lifers will become more Pro Choice, or more rarely, the other way around. You can think of a million other ideas I'm sure. What starts out as a guilty habit can turn into an innocent correction. Anecdotally, this is a good pattern to recognize within one's self, as it leads to the higher roads of being able to forgive others, ask for forgiveness, and become more generally magnanimous.
3. Intentional Deception - Folks who don't believe that truthfulness is important to other people's welfare tend to belong to this class. Political leaders fit in perfectly here. Lying is becoming more common in all facets of leadership positions, across most fields. Now to be fair, we all lie all the time, mostly for practical reasons. When we feel crappy and get the the coffee shop counter, our usual answer to the question, "How are you today?" is, "...good." It's just easier to not get embroiled in explaining why you aren't actually feeling good. Institutionalized deception is the most significant source feeding the wishful thinking of people under the first two categories above.
Of course, the most obvious example is Donald Trump who holds the presidential record for largest number of verified lies so far: 6,420 false or misleading statements in 649 days, as of November 2, 2018, according to the Washington Post. One day he packed in a density of 83 lies. The Donald may be the leader of lies, but just listening to how other world leaders conduct their misinformation in a typical daily newscast, reveals that more and more frequently they don't even try to be truthful anymore. And, in this collective mayhem these guys find common validation for their treachery. There's no need to even think about what is true. The followers under number 1 above will believe automatically, and the followers under number 2 will choose to follow even if they are secretly skeptical. I will expand upon the role of what has been dubbed "gaslighting" (essentially manipulating someone into questioning their own sanity or grasp on reality) among leadership, in future chapters.
We have scratched the surface of this interesting phenomenon, but I haven't done very well with specifics. I wanted to get a general feeling for what wishful thinking is. In all honesty, I don't see wishful thinking as a particularly destructive force in the personal sense--though it may or may not be.
What I am interested in is its impact on groups of people. My hypothesis is that its destructive power resides in the way it perpetuates itself, and that this effect is cumulative. The more people use wishful thinking to explain their reality, the more difficult it is to differentiate what is actually true from what is fantasy, And as more people resort to this defensive shield against what they don't want to be true, the more seductive it becomes to other people as ease-seeking activity.
Why is this dangerous? Because societal soft brainedness may eventually become so habitual as to be incapable of rehabilitation. When over half the population can't help themselves from deceiving and/or being deceived, even the most powerful wishes may not be able to hold up our institutions. I make that statement on the eleventh day of a partial government shutdown in the United States.
The cumulative effect absolutely. Two quotes come to mind here for me. "I don't put much faith in my beliefs because they might be wrong." ( which of course is attributed to more than one human ) and "It is easier to fool someone than it is to convince them that they have been fooled." Well written Alex. Keep up the fine work.
ReplyDelete