On Human Nature

Three Behaviors We Must Consider

 

  1. Home Page
  2. Blog Page home
  3. Checks and Balances Conclusion
  4. Checks and Balances Constitution
  5. Checks and Balances Federalist
  6. On The 4th
  7. Open Letter to Congressman Roy
  8. School Funding

Why Write This

The topic of human nature is extremely broad and much has been written.  When delving into the realm of politics there are a number of those behavioral tendencies that should be kept in the front of our minds.  In this particular age of extreme polarization being aware of why people behave as they do is essential.

This does not go without mention:  I do not pretend to have made a unique revelation now shout it to the world.  Rather I propose to bring a few known issues to the front of people’s minds.  The hope is that some or maybe many readers will consciously, at least occasionally, bring these concepts to the front of their minds and exert a bit of effort in applying them to our political and personal lives.

Jumping to Conclusions

Neuroscientists have developed methods to monitor the human brain and detect many things about how we think.  One of those discoveries is that we make our decisions long before we have all the facts.  Implicit in this is that we make many if not most of our decisions with our emotional brains rather than the rational parts of our brains.

Psychological research shows that not all of our decisions are made rationally.  Indeed, most probably are not.[1]  [2]  [3]  [4]  [5]  [6]

Our decision making just might be the worst with in a political environment.  It is there that we experience some of the greatest pressures to conform.  But, it is there that the consequences of bad decisions are the greatest.  If you, dear reader, do not agree, please use those six footnotes (just above) as a starting point and do your own research.  To continue.

I strongly suspect this was an asset in early human development.  When there was a crisis such as we detected, or even just suspected, that a predator was evaluating us as a meal, we had to act immediately.  We had little to no time to ponder the situation and select from a menu of possible reactions.  When we were a bit too slow to react, we were something’s lunch and were no longer able to contribute to the genetic pool and have any descendants.

Things were much simpler then:  He who hesitates is lost.

In today’s world, we very seldom face those immediate consequences.  However, the fight or flight portions of our brains are difficult to retrain.  We still retain those circuits that make immediate decisions.

Things are much more complicated now than many thousands of years ago.  Now we are much better off when we ponder the choices for a bit before deciding.  We might change the previous slogan of: He who hesitates is lost, to something a bit less than a slogan but more accurate:  He who hesitates is more likely to be right.

But to a large part, we seldom do that.

The second of the two problems compounds the first.

Side note:  We really like our slogans.  Even when they are not entirely accurate, and even quite misleading, we do like them.  That is often a problem, but a topic for another paper.

Reluctance to Change

Return again to prehistoric times and our very early ancestors.  I refer to the times before we developed a comprehensive spoken language.  We were not able to tell anyone what happened to us yesterday, or even just a few minutes ago.  We could not pass on specific knowledge to our offspring.  We could teach them only by demonstration.

This means that we were not able to convey the concept of: That action that I, or someone else, just performed was wrong and for this reason.  That was not possible.

Given that concept, the paramount need was to appear that we are correct.  As a male, if most of the other members of the tribe think I am right in my behavior, that is what counted.  Being right counted only for the immediate life and death situations.  Appearing to be right was paramount in all the other situations.

The conclusion is that being able to change one’s mind was not high on the list of things that helped us acquire breeding rights.  Consequently, that is an attribute that is not foremost in our abilities.

If you disagree, watch young children who have learned a game with one specific set of rules.  Then see what happens when a newcomer suggests a change.  In most cases, either the newcomer adapts to local rules or is simply excluded from the local games.  The children don’t want new ideas, and generally and almost always don’t want new ideas from an outsider.  Republicans tend to think of Democrats as outsiders while the reverse is also true.

But we do have language now.  We can describe behaviors and resultant outcomes.  However, that has not improved our ability to change our minds.  The field of psychology is replete with examples and evidence that we strongly dislike the possibility of changing our mind.  [7]  And from that article, just footnoted, here a paragraph from the first page is quoted just below.

Side Note:  I was not looking for this type of quote, but looking us research on thinking and decision making when I found this.

As a currently relevant example, consider that incontrovertible proof has been discovered that Donald Trump has lied, cheated, stolen, and committed very serious crimes that most people would face significant jail time for. What’s more, he appears to be entirely unfit for the office he holds and has implemented policies that are hurting the vast majority of the people who voted for him. Nevertheless, a great many people who voted for Trump vigorously defend their choice, despite the tremendous amount of credible, incriminating information about him that has come to light since November 8, 2016. Information that, had they been aware of before then, might have dissuaded some from casting their ballot the way they did.

And a bit further down is this sentence:

The bottom line is that when there is a conflict between our attitudes and our behavior, we tend to change our attitudes to make them consistent with our behavior rather than change our behavior to make it consistent with our attitudes.  

The evidence is clear on several points.  We make hasty decisions, and we are reluctant to admit of a poor decision, even just to ourselves, must less to our fellow humans. 

And when those decision are of major importance, we are significantly less likely to change our minds.  That seems to be exactly backwards.  When an decision is of major importance, we should be more prone to examine the facts, review the decision, and reconsider if we made the right choice.  Instead, the more important the decision, the less likely we are to reconsider.

Conclusion

Now that I have presented these findings, I ask that you, dear reader, please take a few moments within the privacy of your personal thoughts, and review the decisions you have made.  Which political positions do you support?  For whom did you vote and why?  Was that a rational decision?

Please think on these things.  In privacy, within just the confines of your mind.  And see what you come up with.

Bryan Kelly

August 2019


[1] How do we really make decisions?  24 February 2014  https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26258662  Here are a few lines extracted from the article: 

We like to think that our beliefs, judgements and opinions are based on solid reasoning. But we may have to think again.

 

Prof Daniel Kahneman, from Princeton University, started a revolution in our understanding of the human mind. It's a revolution that led to him winning a Nobel Prize.

 

His insight into the way our minds work springs from the mistakes that we make. Not random mistakes, but systematic errors that we all make, all the time, without realising.

[end quote]

[2] Humans are born irrational, and that has made us better decision-makers,  https://qz.com/922924/humans-werent-designed-to-be-rational-and-we-are-better-thinkers-for-it/

From the article:  In the 1970s, two psychologists proved, once and for all, that humans are not rational creatures. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky discovered “cognitive biases,” showing that that humans systematically make choices that defy clear logic. [end quote]

The next paragraph continues with:  But what Kahneman and Tversky acknowledged, and is all too often overlooked, is that being irrational is a good thing. We humans don’t always make decisions by carefully weighing up the facts, but we often make better decisions as a result.[end quote]

Yes, but we so often make horrid mistakes.  The evidence for that abounds. 

[3] The Evolutionary Roots of Human Decision Making,  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4451179/

From the introduction to the article:  Our species has long been heralded as “the rational animal,” but you might not know it from a quick glimpse into a psychology textbook. Indeed, after the past 50 years of work in judgment and decision making, we now know that human choice is often not as rational as one might expect. In a number of contexts, human decisions tend to systematically deviate from what rational choice models would predict. [end quote]

 

[4] Decisions are largely emotional, not logical: the neuroscience behind decision-making  https://bigthink.com/experts-corner/decisions-are-emotional-not-logical-the-neuroscience-behind-decision-making

The opening sentence:  At the point of decision, emotions are very important for choosing. In fact even with what we believe are logical decisions, the very point of choice is arguably always based on emotion.

[5] How Do We Humans Ever Make Good Decisions?  https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-prime/201304/how-do-we-humans-ever-make-good-decisions

The first two sentences of the article:  It’s a wonder that good decisions are ever made by the species known as Homo Sapiens. The reality is that the cards are stacked against us whenever we are faced with choices, especially when the decisions are of consequence.

[6] Editorial: Social Pressure and Decision Making, January 26, 2018 - by University Journal Staff https://suunews.net/2018/01/26/editorial-social-pressure-and-decision-making/

From near the end of the opening page: 

 

It is this worry about not being accepted or kicked out of the group that makes humans crave things like fame, followers and admiration. If a major internet celebrity or anyone that people look up to says something is cool to do or think, then the odds are that people will go along with it.

 

Do social pressures really affect an individual’s decision making? Yes, and if people realize and accept it, they can become more aware of their decisions and the reasons they are making them.

[7] Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds.  Why many people don’t let facts get in the way of their cherished beliefs.  https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201812/why-many-people-stubbornly-refuse-change-their-minds

From early in the first page:  This phenomenon, first described by Leon Festinger in 1957, helps explain why so many people will vigorously defend, excuse, justify, and keep their sacred beliefs even when confronted with irrefutable proof they are wrong.