Tables for Your Refrigerator – Forming Political Beliefs

 

 

Table 1A — A General Framework for Discovering Objective Truth

 

1. Ask yourself:  Am I attempting to build or bolster an argument, or am I attempting to arrive at objective truth?  These are very different goals.  

2. Make a conscious effort to stay as open-minded and objective as possible. Take steps to minimize myside bias (see Table 1H).

3. Carefully gather evidence and arguments from the most credible sources on each side of the issue.

4. Assimilate and analyze the information gathered, including using “specialized” forms of thinking, such as scientific and statistical reasoning. 

5. Spend significant time reflecting.

6. Reach a conclusion (form a belief) you treat only as a working hypothesis.

​

​

Table 1B – Six Key “Mis-thinking” Phenomena Associated with Heuristics-based (System 1-based) Belief Formation

 

1. We utilize judgment heuristics (shortcuts), such as substitution of easy-to-answer questions for the original complex, difficult one.

2. Our answers (beliefs) are subject to systematic errors and inaccuracies, referred to as cognitive biases, such as myside bias, and the tendency to form beliefs biased by the beliefs of one’s associates (see Table 1E).

3. We construct arguments utilizing backward thinking, forming beliefs first and only then identifying evidence to support the beliefs we have formed. We feel like it’s the other way around. But it rarely is. 

4. We ignore contradictory evidence and arguments.

5. We exhibit overconfidence in the belief we have formed.

6. We exhibit belief perseverance, whereby we cling ferociously to our beliefs and refuse to reconsider. 

 

​

Table 1C – Competing Goals When People Form Political Beliefs

 

Epistemic Goals             

• Objective thinking and the discovery of objective truth 

​

Instrumental Goals (other subconscious goals that are important to us)

• Speed with minimal effort

• A sense of confidence, with minimal doubt

• Social goals:  the desire to be seen favorably by others, group acceptance, group communication, group cooperation, and group cohesion

• The desire to be moral, and to feel good about ourselves and our groups

• The desire for a sense of purpose, to have meaning in our lives

• Material goals

 

​

Table 1D – Classic Judgment Heuristics We Use in Forming Political Beliefs 

 

Judgment heuristics: Shortcuts we often use in forming our beliefs, such as deferring to intuitions, or using “common sense” -- often involving substitution of easy questions for the original, more difficult ones.       

    

• Availability heuristic – formation of beliefs based on the ease with which instances come to mind.

• Affect heuristic – substitution of heuristic questions for more difficult questions based on our emotions.

• Representativeness heuristic – judging the probability of an occurrence, or the behavior of an individual, based on a prototype we have already created in our minds.

• Adoption of a belief from someone we trust, without evidence and without reflection

 

 

Table 1E -- 2 Classic Cognitive Biases Utilized in the Formation of Political Beliefs

                  

1. Myside Bias: Our new beliefs are biased by our existing convictions, opinions, and attitudes (including our core political identity and political allegiances), those strong beliefs stemming from our worldview and our political ideology, for which we have emotion and even ego involved.

 

       Intelligence and education levels do not confer an advantage!

 

  2.  Our new beliefs are biased by the beliefs of our associates.

 

​

Table 1F -- 3 Key Mental Components of Epistemically Rational Thinking

 

1. Thinking dispositions, or cognitive styles, associated with the reflective mind.  Most fall under the umbrella of AOT, or Actively Open-minded Thinking.

2. Algorithmic-level processing, such as reading and comprehending, assimilating and applying information, and analyzing

3. Mindware, such as scientific thinking, probabilistic reasoning, causal reasoning, and general statistical reasoning (including understanding of general statistical methodology)

 

And remember – even if one has the ideal thinking dispositions, superior algorithmic-level processing ability, and all of the requisite mindware for a particular issue, one must still take steps to minimize myside bias!  (See Table 1H)

 

 

Table 1G -- Some Reflective Thinking Dispositions Critical to Maximizing the Odds of Arriving at Objective Truth  (most fall under the umbrella of AOT, or Actively Open-minded Thinking)

 

• The tendency to base new beliefs on evidence

• The tendency to weight new evidence against a favored belief heavily

• The tendency to seek various points of view before coming to a conclusion.

• The tendency to calibrate the degree of strength of one’s opinion to the degree of evidence available

• The tendency to seek nuance and avoid absolutism.

• The willingness to change one’s mind in the face of new evidence

• The willingness to consider alternative opinions and evidence

• The tendency to think extensively about a problem before responding.

• The tendency to spend a great deal of time on a problem before giving up

 

​

Table 1H -- Approaches for attempting to minimize myside bias

 

• Remind yourself of the ubiquitous, insidious, permeative nature of myside bias and the fact that even if you are using a very sophisticated, methodical, epistemically rational approach to forming a belief, you are still susceptible. it.

• Attempt to decouple.  That is, attempt to separate belief formation from the automatic, intuition-based (heuristics-based) processing that comes so naturally. Resist the temptation to accept the first intuitive answer that comes to mind.  Instead, turn to conscious, effortful reasoning to consider alternative hypotheses. 

• Attempt to decontextualize.  That is, attempt to separate new beliefs from your existing convictions (perhaps especially tribal-based convictions that stem from party loyalty. Just because you support a party does not mean it is innocent of scandal and that every new policy or military action it proposes is worthy of support.).

• Perspective switch. Attempt to look at issues from the perspectives of those you disagree with.

• Remind yourself that differing perspectives may be due to differing values or value systems, as opposed to automatically judging someone you disagree with as unintelligent, poorly informed, or uncaring.

• Remind yourself that one’s strong feelings about political issues, as well as the strong feelings of others, are often more identity-based than issue-based. People often take strong positions on an issue not because they believe strongly in the issue (often, they know little about it), but rather because their tribe has taken a strong position. 

• Remind yourself that people often take strong positions on issues they know little about and that aren’t even related to each other (and are sometimes even in direct conflict) simply because the positions are part of their preferred political party’s political platform.

• Remind yourself of the extent to which the media benefits by fueling conflict and generating outrage.

• Remind yourself that you likely did not carefully reason your way to many of your beliefs – especially those that crystallized during your formative years -- and that perhaps you should therefore take some of your beliefs a bit less seriously. 

 

 

Table 1I -- A Framework for Identifying Objective, Honest, and Accurate Information and Opinion Sources

 

1. Carefully compare the information and opinions provided by sources that support your existing political convictions with multiple sources that do not.

2. Carefully compare the issues covered by each side in the first place.

3. As you perform Steps 1 and 2, above, remember the potential for myside bias. Take steps to minimize it (see Table 1H).

 

Some Criteria for Choosing Information and Opinion Sources when Objective Truth is the Goal … though there is no infallible checklist, and there are exceptions to every rule!

​

Depend on sources who:

• Do not work for large corporations, for billionaires, or for other extremely wealthy individuals.

• Are not politicians.

• Are not high-level federal bureaucrats, with job security and career goals dependent on the degree to which they curry favor with politicians.

• Have no economic or career incentive to conform nor to convey a particular point of view. 

• Do not live in information and opinion bubbles. Find sources who don’t surround themselves only with people who think similarly.

• Use conscious, effortful, epistemically rational (and often science-based) thinking to form their beliefs, and do so extensively. And they “show their work.”

• Are bright, but may or not be super-intelligent and may or may not be highly educated.

• Have careers and/or incomes that are not dependent on generating huge audiences.

• Are not paid for their opinions – or if they are, their pay and career opportunities are not dependent on which conclusions they reach.

• Are speaking within an area in which they have true expertise. It is okay if they have acquired the expertise on their own and if that expertise is outside their university degree. 

• Are not afraid to go against the grain and even to be admonished for their beliefs. Find sources who do not seem to have an overwhelming need to be praised or accepted by their peers, and for whom truth seems to be all that matters.

 

If most or all of the people who meet the above criteria come down on one side of the issue and are castigated by the mainstream, consider their opinions very seriously.