[Peace-discuss] “You are BIASED and I am not.” V042021

[Szoke, Ron]

Copied from the “critical thinking / cognitive bias” cards distributed by the School of Thought
   [ My interpolated comments are in square brackets. — RSz. ] 

> THE JUST WORLD HYPOTHESIS
Your preference for a just world makes you presume that it exists.  A world in which people don’t always get what they deserve is an uncomfortable one that threatens our preferred narrative.  A more just world requires understanding rather than blame. Try to remember that we’re all fallible, and that bad things happen to good people.

[ And, of course, the flip side is that — in defiance of the karmic principle— good things sometimes happen to bad & unworthy people: sometimes they do win the lottery, the billions, the award, the prize or the election.  
   This is a standard ingredient of wishful & magical thinking.  Many people seem to have the naive belief that a sort of rough justice prevails in the world, & that most people pretty much get what they deserve.  Some believe that goodness, merit & virtue are ultimately rewarded (in Heaven if nowhere else — pie in sky bye & bye, etc.  Some theologies are built on this principle.) More mundane is the common practice of blaming the victim : she deserved it, he had it coming, they brought it on themselves (having made bad choices), etc. ]  

>  SELF-SERVING BIAS
You believe your failures are due to external factors, yet you’re personally responsible for your successes. Many of us enjoy unearned privileges, luck and advantages that others don’t.  It’s easy to tell ourselves that we deserve these things, while blaming circumstances when things don’t go our way.

[ Consider the common case of high public officials who take credit for a rising stock market & 
burgeoning economy, but refuse to admit any responsibility when things are moving in the opposite direction. ]

>  FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR  
You judge others on their character, but yourself on the situation. It’s not only kind to view others’ perspectives with charity, it’s more objective too.  Try to err on the side of taking personal responsibility rather than justifying and blaming.  

[ This has become one of the commonplaces of academic social psychology in response to 
the ever-insistent question: Who/what  do we BLAME when bad things happen? (Favorites are: the Establishment, the Russians, the CIA, the Democrats, “human nature,” “society,” one’s personal enemies, the Devil, God.)  Instead, ask: what can I/we constructively do to solve or ameliorate this problem?  
   Insightful:  Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson, _Mistakes Were Made (but not by ME)_ : Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts (Harcourt, 2007, 292 pages).  See, on the “Central Park Jogger” case of 1989 : Five teenage Black & Hispanic boys were accused of raping and bludgeoning the female victim and luridly confessed to the crime.  “Donald Trump spent $80,000 on newspaper ads calling for them to get the death penalty.” But they were later proved to be innocent (p. 129).  
   You might be astonished by the frequency with which some people “confess” to sensational crimes that they did not commit. ]
  
    #  #   #