(no subject)
Jan. 22nd, 2002 08:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
johnpalmerWhat do you call it when you do something that you think is okay, because it'd be okay with you? (Or, more precisely, what should *I* call it, when I did something, etc.. Yes, I'm explaining a rhetorical question. So sue me.)
Well, "being human" is a good start, I suppose, and you have to keep that in perspective. Humans make mistakes, and the accidental assumption of similarity is probably one of the most common mistakes humans can make.
But I wanted to go a bit deeper than that. What is the root of an accidental assumption of similarity, when you know there are differences?
Keep in mind, when I say "assumption", I mean something other than "guess". If I like Sam Adams beer, I can "guess" that someone else will like it, and offer that person some, and if that person says s/he doesn't like it, it turns out I guessed wrong. No biggie. An assumption would be buying a case of Sam Adams to give to a beer drinker when you wanted to buy that person a gift.
Why do we make assumptions like that? Well, usually because they're easy.
Okay, but what do easy assumptions mean? Why would we want an easy assumption?
Because it gives us an answer to a question that we want an answer for.
Wait a minute... we want an answer... and an assumption gives it to us, so we take it?
What's that fallacy called? When you take something as true, simply because it's desirable? Wishful thinking... one of the nastiest fallacies of all.
Now, I'm going to overdramatize a bit (keep in mind that I *DO* have a passion for understatement :-) ), given the mundanity of the original "I did something I thought was okay, because it would have been okay with me".
But, wishful thinking is the greatest enemy of the truth that's out there. Because, you see, no one really has a problem believing a truth that they want to believe. The only time dedication to truth is challenged, is when you don't want to believe in the truth.
(Herm. I feel an urge to mention that I'm not suggesting that people see the answers they want to see, and don't bother checking them. I'm saying that, when you see evidence for a truth you don't like, it's then that you'd like to be able to disregard the evidence. If it was evidence for a truth you liked, hopefully you'll still want to check the evidence carefully, but you're happy, and it won't make you happy to find a flaw. It's when you don't like the truth that you'd be happy to find a flaw. You can still be honest and fair, but it's a little bit harder.)
Where was I? Oh, yeah, greatest enemy of truth, and all that.
Anyway... it means that the accidental assumption - again, not 'guess' - of similarity is really the wishful thinking fallacy, and deserving of being stomped out with prejudice. (Arg. Unintentional pun. But it kinda works. It should be stomped out, no questions asked, and you should be stomping it out when you're stomping out all of your harmful prejudices.)
Making such an assumption means I engaged in "wishful thinking", something I hate doing.
And it's good to say that, because, given the circumstances, it could have been called "wishful thinking" of another sort.
However, if J. Random Person so labelled it, I'd be in JRP's face over what the 'wish' was. "No, I was not wishing for X!", but there it is... the implicit admission that there might be a Y that I was wishing for.
And once Y is 'big enough', wishful thinking a really bad idea, for a bunch of reasons.
(You might ask "what do you mean by 'once Y is big enough?'" The answer is, there are times when wishful thinking is helpful. If you pretend you are confident, as if you already were confident, it can lead you to be confident. If you act as if you'd be liked, because you want to be liked, it can lead to being liked. But, pretending to be confident can also lead to arrogance, and pretending to be likable can keep you from evaluating your personality flaws, if you 'wish' too hard.)
Sigh. But yep, this was wishful thinking, and while the Y wasn't huge, I think it was more than big enough.
No need to beat myself up... but there is, I think, a potent need to remember that I didn't need to assume... I could have *GUESSED*, and worked like it was a guess. That would have avoided some meaingful unpleasantness.
(Huh? Oh. Very clever... yes, 'no need to beat myself up' doesn't mean 'so I won't beat myself up'. Folks like me brood over mistakes. However, seeing that there's "no need" means that once my brain stops the uncontrollable picking at it, I can make damn sure I don't do any controllable picking.)
Well, "being human" is a good start, I suppose, and you have to keep that in perspective. Humans make mistakes, and the accidental assumption of similarity is probably one of the most common mistakes humans can make.
But I wanted to go a bit deeper than that. What is the root of an accidental assumption of similarity, when you know there are differences?
Keep in mind, when I say "assumption", I mean something other than "guess". If I like Sam Adams beer, I can "guess" that someone else will like it, and offer that person some, and if that person says s/he doesn't like it, it turns out I guessed wrong. No biggie. An assumption would be buying a case of Sam Adams to give to a beer drinker when you wanted to buy that person a gift.
Why do we make assumptions like that? Well, usually because they're easy.
Okay, but what do easy assumptions mean? Why would we want an easy assumption?
Because it gives us an answer to a question that we want an answer for.
Wait a minute... we want an answer... and an assumption gives it to us, so we take it?
What's that fallacy called? When you take something as true, simply because it's desirable? Wishful thinking... one of the nastiest fallacies of all.
Now, I'm going to overdramatize a bit (keep in mind that I *DO* have a passion for understatement :-) ), given the mundanity of the original "I did something I thought was okay, because it would have been okay with me".
But, wishful thinking is the greatest enemy of the truth that's out there. Because, you see, no one really has a problem believing a truth that they want to believe. The only time dedication to truth is challenged, is when you don't want to believe in the truth.
(Herm. I feel an urge to mention that I'm not suggesting that people see the answers they want to see, and don't bother checking them. I'm saying that, when you see evidence for a truth you don't like, it's then that you'd like to be able to disregard the evidence. If it was evidence for a truth you liked, hopefully you'll still want to check the evidence carefully, but you're happy, and it won't make you happy to find a flaw. It's when you don't like the truth that you'd be happy to find a flaw. You can still be honest and fair, but it's a little bit harder.)
Where was I? Oh, yeah, greatest enemy of truth, and all that.
Anyway... it means that the accidental assumption - again, not 'guess' - of similarity is really the wishful thinking fallacy, and deserving of being stomped out with prejudice. (Arg. Unintentional pun. But it kinda works. It should be stomped out, no questions asked, and you should be stomping it out when you're stomping out all of your harmful prejudices.)
Making such an assumption means I engaged in "wishful thinking", something I hate doing.
And it's good to say that, because, given the circumstances, it could have been called "wishful thinking" of another sort.
However, if J. Random Person so labelled it, I'd be in JRP's face over what the 'wish' was. "No, I was not wishing for X!", but there it is... the implicit admission that there might be a Y that I was wishing for.
And once Y is 'big enough', wishful thinking a really bad idea, for a bunch of reasons.
(You might ask "what do you mean by 'once Y is big enough?'" The answer is, there are times when wishful thinking is helpful. If you pretend you are confident, as if you already were confident, it can lead you to be confident. If you act as if you'd be liked, because you want to be liked, it can lead to being liked. But, pretending to be confident can also lead to arrogance, and pretending to be likable can keep you from evaluating your personality flaws, if you 'wish' too hard.)
Sigh. But yep, this was wishful thinking, and while the Y wasn't huge, I think it was more than big enough.
No need to beat myself up... but there is, I think, a potent need to remember that I didn't need to assume... I could have *GUESSED*, and worked like it was a guess. That would have avoided some meaingful unpleasantness.
(Huh? Oh. Very clever... yes, 'no need to beat myself up' doesn't mean 'so I won't beat myself up'. Folks like me brood over mistakes. However, seeing that there's "no need" means that once my brain stops the uncontrollable picking at it, I can make damn sure I don't do any controllable picking.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-01-23 07:53 am (UTC)You said:
"But, wishful thinking is the greatest enemy of the truth that's out there. Because, you see, no one really has a problem believing a truth that they want to believe. The only time dedication to truth is challenged, is when you don't want to believe in the truth."
and that doesn't quite work for me. If it's something in the area of feelings, then I have a really hard time accepting something that I badly want to believe, precisely because I want to believe it: I second-guess myself, and distrust my own responses. Burnt child fears the fire, I guess.
Just datapointing ...
no subject
Date: 2002-01-24 01:20 am (UTC)But, sometimes you don't want to 'believe' what you most want to be true. The root of the post here, the situation that I was writing about, well, what I want most to be true is that it's actually going to evolve into a positive experience.
It would be nice if something good came out of unpleasantness. But what I want most to believe, what is most seductive, and what is easiest, is "I fucked up; I've ruined everything; the situation is mortally wounded, and if I wasn't such a complete fucking IDIOT, I'd bail now because there's no fixing it."
See, if it's totally ruined, yeah, that's terrible. But it's easy. Nothing left to do, but walk away and hurt (and mourn, and eventually, get over it). I don't have any duty to try to fix things, after hurting someone I care about on some level. I don't have to try to deal with the situation anymore. I don't have to think "What if I screw up?" because, "ta da! Already done, thankyewverymuch."
What is most seductive, what is easiest to believe, is what I least want to be true. What I most want to be true is what I find hardest to believe. Since 'belief' is a simple matter of acceptance, on a very real level, I don't 'want' to believe what I most want to be true... and, in this case, for the obvious reason: if I accepted this as true, and was wrong, the pain would be much worse than if I never believed it at all.
At least in *THIS* situation, I find it relatively easy to play "champion for the truth", and not accept the negative without (essentially) absolute proof.
no subject
Date: 2002-01-24 08:36 am (UTC)Thank you for explaining that.