Every cognitive bias exists for a reason
October 13, 2016 11:54 PM   Subscribe

 
Problem 1: Too much information

Solution: here, have a list of six hundred individual items, with each name helpfully linked to an entire Wikipedia article about it
posted by DoctorFedora at 12:28 AM on October 14, 2016 [44 favorites]




MetaFilter: if we accept that we are permanently biased—and that there’s room for improvement—confirmation bias will continue to help us find evidence that supports this, which will ultimately lead us to better understand ourselves.
posted by hippybear at 2:20 AM on October 14, 2016 [10 favorites]


Where is the 'me' that isn't my brain?
posted by Splunge at 2:50 AM on October 14, 2016 [9 favorites]


organic computers in bone jars driving meat robots
posted by hippybear at 2:51 AM on October 14, 2016 [24 favorites]


Where is the 'me' that isn't my brain?

Dunno. What's the last place where you definitely remember having it with you?
posted by flabdablet at 2:59 AM on October 14, 2016 [51 favorites]


These types of articles make my spine tingle. I love, love, love reading and talking about cognitive bias and critical thinking. I find it fascinating! But when it becomes overwhelming, which it always does, I must return to my beloved Wendell Berry.

Never forget: We are alive within mysteries.

Laugh.
Laughter is immeasurable. Be joyful
though you have considered all the facts.


Sometimes you just need a really good poet to help you understand the incomprehensible.
posted by pjsky at 3:23 AM on October 14, 2016 [8 favorites]


I haven't yet read about how lies live and grow in the brain! And how do they cause the sniffles? Very curious to know. Thanks.
posted by adept256 at 3:35 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


MetaFilter: if we accept that we are permanently biased—and that there’s room for improvement—confirmation bias will continue to help us find evidence that supports this, which will ultimately lead us to better understand ourselves.

Flagged: Offensive.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 3:57 AM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


A somewhat pious researcher applies for a grant to study whether people who take religious rituals when older are healthier as a rule. This application is rejected out of hand with a slightly acrimonious tone.

The researcher, a bit frustrated, writes to ask why. It's not mystical in nature - it probably links with having support groups as one gets older. It's a valid question.

"We know", comes the reply. "But there would be far too much Confirmation bias."
posted by solarion at 4:13 AM on October 14, 2016 [16 favorites]


This is a great piece of work. The headline seems a bit odd, though, and quite misleading - it makes it sound like a piece Nick Bostrom dictated while drunk.
posted by Segundus at 4:25 AM on October 14, 2016


organic computers in bone jars driving meat robots

with a great deal of frequently overlooked processing offloaded to the peripherals
posted by flabdablet at 5:16 AM on October 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


A related discussion I came across just yesterday, courtesy of @pinboard: epistemic learned helplessness, or why you shouldn't take ideas seriously.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 6:18 AM on October 14, 2016 [10 favorites]


This is great. It reminds me of my favorite bumper sticker: Don't Believe Everything You Think.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 6:32 AM on October 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


I've heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect for years, of course, but I don't think I knew (or I have forgotten because of cue-based forgetfulness) that the original study had this genesis (emphasis mine):
The phenomenon was first experimentally observed in a series of experiments by David Dunning and Justin Kruger of the department of psychology at Cornell University in 1999. The study was inspired by the case of McArthur Wheeler, a man who robbed two banks after covering his face with lemon juice in the mistaken belief that, because lemon juice is usable as invisible ink, it would prevent his face from being recorded on surveillance cameras

Just ... wow.
posted by rmd1023 at 6:40 AM on October 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


This is great:

How to compose a successful critical commentary:
1. You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”
2. You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
3. You should mention anything that you have learned from your target.
4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

Love this post, thanks.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:44 AM on October 14, 2016 [34 favorites]


What the fuck? I haven't read the rest of the article yet, but this doesn't sound right to me.

We evolved in an environment in which we were not the top of the food chain.
posted by ryanshepard at 6:57 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Problem 3: The need to act fast

What the fuck? I haven't read the rest of the article yet, but this doesn't sound right to me


There are a gazillion articles linked to in MetaFilter posts and our time is limited, so we need to quickly determine which ones are worth reading or worth reading to the end.
posted by nangar at 7:17 AM on October 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


We evolved in an environment in which we were not the top of the food chain.


This is one theory. I bet the environment where the most distinctive evolution occurred was one where the homos were at least the equal to the top of the food chain. Did you know that mountain lions are afraid of humans?
posted by bukvich at 7:36 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


> A related discussion I came across just yesterday, courtesy of @pinboard: epistemic learned helplessness, or why you shouldn't take ideas seriously.

Thanks for that; it's an excellent read. Excerpt:
But to these I would add that a sufficiently smart engineer has never been burned by arguments above his skill level before, has never had any reason to develop epistemic learned helplessness. If Osama comes up to him with a really good argument for terrorism, he thinks "Oh, there's a good argument for terrorism. I guess I should become a terrorist," as opposed to "Arguments? You can prove anything with arguments. I'll just stay right here and not do something that will get me ostracized and probably killed."

Responsible doctors are at the other end of the spectrum from terrorists in this regard. I once heard someone rail against how doctors totally ignored all the latest and most exciting medical studies. The same person, practically in the same breath, then railed against how 50% to 90% of medical studies are wrong. These two observations are not unrelated. Not only are there so many terrible studies, but pseudomedicine (not the stupid homeopathy type, but the type that links everything to some obscure chemical on an out-of-the-way metabolic pathway) has, for me, proven much like pseudohistory in that unless I am an expert in that particular field of medicine (biochemistry has a disproportionate share of these people and is also an area where I'm weak) it's hard not to take them seriously, even when they're super-wrong.
> It reminds me of my favorite bumper sticker: Don't Believe Everything You Think.

That's my basic operating principle. I figure since most of what everyone else in history has ever thought has been wrong, most of what I think is wrong too. I still think it, but I don't take it too seriously. Life is much less stressful that way!
posted by languagehat at 7:40 AM on October 14, 2016 [10 favorites]


Problem 3: The need to act fast

There are definitely times when social factors and other more practical concerns make it necessary to be able to make decisions quickly and decisively even if there isn't time to really think through the decision, even without jungle predators waiting in the trees to pounce if we're too indecisive. So we have to have heuristics and conceptual short cuts that are ultimately lazy and may lead us to make bad decisions in the moment.

It's because there's a real tension and opportunity for disconnect between short term choices and long term consequences and outcomes. Just taking what seem to be reasonable steps in the moment, with a narrow focus on short term interests, feelings, and desires can lead to results that in the longer term don't make any sense, if the choices are made without any bigger picture, longer term view. Tiny, reasonable seeming steps can easily lead us to completely unreasonable places if we aren't mindful of where we're trying to go and don't have a longer term vision of what outcomes we want.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:47 AM on October 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


“Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?'
Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
Man got to tell himself he understand.”

Bokonon's got bars...

And yo I dig this post like a cosmic ghost haunting a meat covered skeleton & like gelatin shiver and shake I must entrust & bust it motherfuckers my brain is stardust (mic drop)
posted by Bob Regular at 8:14 AM on October 14, 2016 [5 favorites]


We evolved in an environment in which we were not the top of the food chain.

Even if you're at the top of the food chain, you may still need to be able to act fast. Game animals aren't going to just lie down at your feet, you know. Both predators and prey have the same basic problem, with a slightly different twist: "am I going to be eaten" vs "am I going to eat or starve". The state of nature is "nasty, brutish and short" for pretty much every creature on any part of the food chain.
posted by me & my monkey at 8:59 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is one theory. I bet the environment where the most distinctive evolution occurred was one where the homos were at least the equal to the top of the food chain. Did you know that mountain lions are afraid of humans?

This is an example of survivor bias. Almost all non-domestic land animals that still exist are afraid of humans because we killed all of the ones that didn't avoid us ( we still do! ).
posted by srboisvert at 10:59 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


The title of this post is insanely clever
posted by skwt at 11:15 AM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Reality? You mean, this is the real world? Huh. I never thought of that.
posted by xedrik at 11:33 AM on October 14, 2016




Bias and lies are not the best way to understand these. They are heuristics that the human brain (or any limited capacity information processing system) needs to use to some degree if it is to cope with messy, complex reality in real-time.
The heuristics work well enough in many situations, but there are situations where they result in problems.
posted by neutralmojo at 5:27 PM on October 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


organic computers in bone jars driving meat robots

with a great deal of frequently overlooked processing offloaded to the peripherals


Hey man if it wasn't for offloaded peripherals none of us would be here
posted by St. Peepsburg at 8:08 PM on October 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


« Older ♪♫ One of modern history’s most reviled inventions...   |   nothing really matters Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments