Sans Fig Leaf
w
"With blinders"
27 January, 2005
A recent news story caused a lot of amusement in some circles. A poll had revealed that the American public was just about equally divided on the question of whether the current president has united or divided the country. Many people pointed out that it was as if half the country was shouting at the other half, "You agree with us, you just don't realize it!"
Cute image, but I'm not sure that's what the folks who picked "united" were thinking. A more prosaic explanation could be that the folks who picked united perceived that the contry was much most factionized before. Perhaps they believed that a decade ago only 30% of all people agreed with them, while the remaining 70% were divided into three or four other camps. Then having 51% agreeing now would be an improvement in their eyes.
But I don't think that's really what's going on. On questions like that, people aren't that analytical. People will go with their feelings.
The poll is simply a symptom of a more fundamental shortsightedness that all people suffer from, at least occasionally. Most people assume that they are typical. For example, I can't count how many people I've met who have incomes far in excess of the national median, whose parents sent them to private schools, drove expensive cars, and belonged to country clubs--yet they are convinced that they are just average people from a middle class background.
Worse, most people assume that their friends and acquaintences are an accurate representation of society at large. If 90% of their friends share the same feeling on an issue, they assume that something close to 90% of the nation does, as well.
They will cling to this belief in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If polls or an election shows that far more than 10% disagree with them, they will rationalize it away as the result of a very loud minority distorting the results. They'll point to the voter turn-out numbers and be quite confident that 99.9% of those who didn't manage or bother to vote that year agree with them.
A related phenomenon is a kind of selective blindness. Sometimes we literally don't see things that don't match our expectations.
A few years ago, when I was filling in for a sick DJ at a convention, I had a number of curious conversations. Middle-aged fans would come up to talk about the music we were playing, and firmly assert the "fact" that the majority of people attending the event was their age or older. Early twenties fans would come up to talk about the music and state just as confidently that most attendees were their age or younger.
They were looking at the same crowded room (which was filled with a fairly even mix of people spanning a couple decades in age). They had been in the same halls and events in the convention center. The young fan simply failed to see or retain how many of the people were noticeably older. The middle-aged fan was doing the same with the younger faces in the crowd.
They looked at the same crowd, but perceived it in profoundly different ways.
I catch myself falling into these fallacies. Sometimes in harlmess ways, such as when I assume that people are familiar with the same books I am. Other times it's not so harmless. If I'm lucky, I just stick my foot in my mouth. It's embarassing and sometimes people's feelings are hurt, but usually nothing irreparable.
I haven't found a magic cure to the problem. The only thing that seems to help is to remind myself to try to look at things from other people's viewpoints, question my assumptions, and always be ready to change my mind.
--George Carlin