Why Cognitive Accuracy?
In my view, the better question might be "Why NOT?" Why would I not work to adapt my actions and choices to reflect as accurately as possible the way the world seems to work?
Today I read this quote:
There are two things to aim at in life; first to get what you want, and after that to enjoy it. Only the wisest of mankind achieve the second. -Logan Pearsall Smith, essayist (1865-1946)
At first, this seems like a wise observation. Then it occurred to me...what if we think of this in light of cognitive accuracy?
What do we mean by "get what you want"? Do you *know* what you want? Do you know how to "get" it? Do you know whether you can "enjoy it" after you get it?
What if, instead, we thought of it this way:
In life, the wisest of us look for ways to maximize whatever we find enjoyable, and minimize what we find least so.
This view acknowledges that we may not necessarily know what we find enjoyable, that we may not have the means to "get what we want", and that we do best to take a pragmatic, cognitively accurate view of what we do encounter, enjoyable or not.
Here's an example of political speech that I would like to see analyzed. Unfortunately, it's not from a major candidate, but rather from a comment to an
article in the Boston paper, concerning the off-shore drilling bill passed last night by the House. Here's the comment:
Utilizing our natural resources is imperative to all Americans in these troubled times. All of America is being scrutinized and manipulated both home and abroad by a failed domestic energy policy that has been being developed and legislated long before Bush ever came to office. America as a whole has to wake up and decide if we are to going to keep putting our culture, families, and country at risk by being politically correct, or are we going roll up our sleeves and take control of our countries destiny by building a bridge to the future. The bridge we need is paved with security and its piers are a developed platform of usable energy that can sustain OUR economy... end of story. To allow our leaders to continue to make this a "political issue" is leaving all of we Americans in the lurch and putting our countries long term survivability at grave risk.
I feel pretty sure this guy thinks he said something meaningful and comprehensible. But from what I know about the basic positions of the "two" sides (drill/don't drill), I cannot tell if this person favors drilling or rejects it in favor of "renewables". Can you? Lots of great words and phrases, no clarity, little meaning.
I came across
this very well-written and useful analysis of bias recently.
I especially like the article on "Superhumans", in which the author notes that we humans tend to behave as if we had super human powers, like senses that give us a direct and accurate picture of the world, or memory that does not distort and amend the events it purports to represent, etc.
An excerpt:
Quoting Tavris and Aronson (2007) Mistakes Were Made (but not by me):
Scientific reasoning is useful to anyone in any job because it makes us face the possibility, even the dire reality, that we were mistaken. It forces us to confront our self-justifications and put them on public display for others to puncture. At its core, therefore, science is a form of arrogance control.
How much more would we enjoy our lives if we simply accepted the incontrovertible fact of our own flawed humanity?
Posts
