Slashdot Mirror


Magical Thinking Is Good For You

Hugh Pickens writes "Natalie Wolchover says even the most die-hard skeptics among us believe in magic. Humans can't help it: though we try to be logical, irrational beliefs — many of which we aren't even conscious of — are hardwired in our psyches. 'The unavoidable habits of mind that make us think luck and supernatural forces are real, that objects and symbols have power, and that humans have souls and destinies are part of what has made our species so evolutionarily successful,' writes Wolchover. 'Believing in magic is good for us.' For example, what do religion, anthropomorphism, mysticism and the widespread notion that each of us has a destiny to fulfill have in common? According to research by Matthew Hutson, underlying all these forms of magical thinking is the innate sense that everything happens for a reason. And that stems from paranoia, which is a safety mechanism that protects us. 'We have a bias to see events as intentional, and to see objects as intentionally designed,' says Hutson. 'If we don't see any biological agent, like a person or animal, then we might assume that there's some sort of invisible agent: God or the universe in general with a mind of its own.' According to anthropologists, the reason we have a bias to assume things are intentional is that typically it's safer to spot another agent in your environment than to miss another agent. 'It's better to mistake a boulder for a bear than a bear for a boulder,' says Stewart Guthrie. In a recent Gallup poll, three in four Americans admitted to believing in at least one paranormal phenomenon. 'But even for those few of us who claim to be complete skeptics, belief quietly sneaks in. Maybe you feel anxious on Friday the 13th. Maybe the idea of a heart transplant from a convicted killer weirds you out. ... If so, on some level you believe in magic.'"

41 of 467 comments (clear)

  1. Baloney by dtmos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But even for those few of us who claim to be complete skeptics, belief quietly sneaks in.

    Nope. Not a bit of it. In my experience, only believers believe that everyone else must secretly be a believer. The rest of us live a fact-based life.

    1. Re:Baloney by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But even for those few of us who claim to be complete skeptics, belief quietly sneaks in.

      Nope. Not a bit of it. In my experience, only believers believe that everyone else must secretly be a believer. The rest of us live a fact-based life.

      I think you are thinking of a complete belief in magical thinking, whereas this is talking about the "magical" type of thought that "this car does not like you to use full throttle until its warmed up", or feeling anger at a beer bottle with a top thet "doesn't want to come off". If you stop and reflect of course you know its nonsense, but I bet you sometimes have those thoughts anyway.

    2. Re:Baloney by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

      I say "Oh God" when I'm having sex, doesn't mean I believe in god one bit.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Baloney by foobsr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      fact-based

      Good luck evaluating all those 'objective' facts coming in via your senses.

      Recommended: Some WITTGENSTEIN.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    4. Re:Baloney by NeverSuchBefore · · Score: 5, Funny

      I say "Oh God" when I'm having sex

      So... never?

    5. Re:Baloney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, someone's being a real Capricorn!

    6. Re:Baloney by Algae_94 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's just language. Saying a bottle top "doesn't want to come off" doesn't imply that the speaker truly believes the bottle top is sentient and wants to stay capped to the bottle. Likewise saying "this car does not like you to use full throttle until its warmed up" would be a way to communicate to someone that the engine doesn't function properly at cold temps and full throttle. I don't see how those types of sayings equate to someone believing in "magic".

    7. Re:Baloney by laughingcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think using an occasional anthropomorphic expression in jest reflects "magical thinking." If you really believe that the car consciously dislikes going full throttle before getting warm, or the bottle has made a choice to hang onto the cap, that's magical thinking. But I don't think most who use those expressions mean them literally.

      --
      To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
    8. Re:Baloney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "does not like you to use full throttle until its warmed up" with "a top thet 'doesn't want to come off'"

      That's not magic, that's my wife.

    9. Re:Baloney by slew · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course in my experience, some people believe that everything which is written in a slashdot comment is true.
      The rest of us live a fact-based life.

    10. Re:Baloney by chadenright · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But even for those few of us who claim to be complete skeptics, belief quietly sneaks in.

      Nope. Not a bit of it. In my experience, only believers believe that everyone else must secretly be a believer. The rest of us live a fact-based life.

      I think you are thinking of a complete belief in magical thinking, whereas this is talking about the "magical" type of thought that "this car does not like you to use full throttle until its warmed up", or feeling anger at a beer bottle with a top thet "doesn't want to come off". If you stop and reflect of course you know its nonsense, but I bet you sometimes have those thoughts anyway.

      I've found that that kind of anthropomorphization is useful as placeholders for other, complex causations. Perhaps the car has a mechanical or design flaw that makes full throttle when it's cold problematic. Perhaps the beer bottle has a manufacturer defect making it extra-hard to open. In either case, anthropomorphizing it can be a useful placeholder for the exact cause of your difficulties.

    11. Re:Baloney by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Funny

      Heh. I think that a person is allowed two irrational beliefs per lifetime, if only because it makes them more interesting.

      What's your second one?

    12. Re:Baloney by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, I'll admit to this. I'm a Secular Humanist, I don't think that there are any forces out there that are caused by magical critters and that we could explain it all with some simple science. I know that we don't have all the answers, but I don't think any of the answers are "ghosts", "a wizard did it" or "it was the Hand of God!"

      Yet, for some reason, computers and electronics will start working better when I get close to them. It's almost like they know that I am ready, willing, and eager to take them apart and that I'm carrying a screwdriver. It's even the machines that I haven't seen before.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    13. Re:Baloney by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Those aren't quite the same things. In the case of warming up the car, that's not magical thinking, it is thinking something wrong. Not everyone knows everything, so all of us are going to think things that are false if they are about topics beyond our knowledge, but being wrong isn't the same as magical thinking. I don't know how cars work that well. For all I know, doing that could be problematic for a valid, scientifically explainable reason. I could tell a skeptic, as a random example, that putting nitrogen on their lawn will improve its ability to stay green in the middle of summer, and since a lot of people wouldn't know one way or the other about that, it would be easy to accept that as fact and assume there's a biological explanation they simply don't know, when it is not. That does not indicate magical thinking, just that it is not humanely possible to investigate every single thing you hear, so some untrue things are going to slip past the ol' BS detector. The second example is just emotion, and everyone gets irrational emotions every now and again. Again, it isn't the same as magical thinking. The examples the article mentions (fear of Friday 13th, thinking your pants will summon friends, and the organ transplant thing) on the other hand are pretty clear examples of magical thinking. Believing in connections that aren't there and make no sense is what magical thinking is about, not simply being wrong or having an irrational moment.

    14. Re:Baloney by Cylix · · Score: 4, Funny

      I asked my car very nicely to start in the morning.

      Unfortunately, it doesn't always work and it the vehicle tells me to go f' myself. Repeatedly hitting the car can coax some much needed respect, but I've stopped doing that now. The other day I was about to strike the dashboard and it said, "Maybe today your breaks fail when you exit the intersection. Maybe they work just fine. I dunno, I'm not really an expert on brakes. I do know that seat belt has been real finicky lately. Just sayin."

      Anyhow, that is the last time I buy a used car from an Italian stereotype.

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    15. Re:Baloney by Jonner · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've found that that kind of anthropomorphization is useful as placeholders for other, complex causations. Perhaps the car has a mechanical or design flaw that makes full throttle when it's cold problematic. Perhaps the beer bottle has a manufacturer defect making it extra-hard to open. In either case, anthropomorphizing it can be a useful placeholder for the exact cause of your difficulties.

      I think that's a very good distillation of TFA. I would go a little farther and question the inherent difference between something you can't explain and magic. I think of the supernatural as things that we can't yet understand rather than things that no one can ever understand. As Arthur C. Clarke said, Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

      So much of what happens around us is far to complex for to understand in every detail. So to make up for what we don't understand, everyday life requires operating on many assumptions and intuitions that can't be tested scientifically. Just because I believe that there exists a rational explanation for everything that happens, it doesn't follow that I do or ever will know all those explanations. Indeed, without omnipotence, how can anyone be sure that there is a rational explanation for everything? Operating on that unprovable assumption is what enables scientific discovery.

    16. Re:Baloney by BlueScreenO'Life · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It does take a leap of faith to state "There is no God" (atheism). The sentence isn't testable or falsable.

      Agnosticism, on the other hand, is truly faithless as it avoids the question of God's existence (or at least it admits it is pointless).

    17. Re:Baloney by poity · · Score: 4, Funny

      Man, I was into solipsism BEFORE it was popular!

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    18. Re:Baloney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's just language, it's just your brain, but the concept, even if you KNOW it isn't true, still defines your thought processes.

      Now you can be an obstinate little bitch and insist "not at all," but here's your chance to have some insight to your own mind and not resist the implication and consider it, at least. Believing you are infallible and immune to this IS magical thinking.

    19. Re:Baloney by Your.Master · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's just solipsism. The statement "BlueScreenO'Life's messages were written by a human being, and not by a confused monkey given a netbook in a zoo for the purpose of re-writing Shakespeare" is a leap of faith in exactly the same sense that "God does not exist" is a leap of faith. You could argue that maybe you have enough personal information on the net for me to find your address and track you down, but that assumes the information is not part of an elaborate deception.* And anyway the idea that there is any objective reality at all outside of my own thoughts is the same sort of leap of faith. The Occam's razor position is a reasonable default in most cases.

      There's some parallel in that example to one common Young Earth Creationist Apologetics argument where dinosaur bones were placed in such a way as to give the appearance of age, but creation actually happened ~6000 years ago. That, too, is an unfalsifiable claim. But the leap to say that a being, even an omnipotent being, arranged an elaborate deception, writing in a convincing backstory for all sentient creations, is not the same as a leap to say that the world is probably substantially older than 6000 years old since all signs point to it being older than 6000 years old.*

      I'm not an angry atheist. You want to believe, fine, whatever, so long as you don't actively harm people around you or your children then that's cool. People are wrong about a lot of things and often it doesn't really matter a whole lot, and entertained by all kinds of things I think are boring, and bored by things that are clearly awesome. And if you truly have no opinion, fine. But the argument that the atheist has faith in a sense comparable to the religious faith is at best an equivocation.

      * I know there are YEC-ers on slashdot, that would either claim that isn't their position, or that the position is valid. If you are one and you're tempted to reply, remember the context is that I'm claiming YEC people have faith. I think that's difficult to deny.

    20. Re:Baloney by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I say "Oh God" when I'm having sex, doesn't mean I believe in god one bit.

      I don't bother saying "Oh God" when I have sex any more. I mean, it's not like the Real Doll can hear, anyway.

      And I turn my stuffed animals to face the wall because they can be so judgmental.

      But seriously, there is no one who can completely eliminate the kind of non-fact based thoughts known as "magical thinking" from their lives. At least not anyone psychologically healthy. There well may be some mental pathologies that create purely rational people, but I don't think they'd be people you would want to be around much. Optimism is my favorite example of "magical thinking" that is very healthy. It is every bit as irrational as believing that touching a door frame as you leave a room will protect you from harm. Another favorite type of magical thinking is empathy. I think this is why people who make a big deal out of being "skeptics" are usually so incredibly unpleasant. Especially the pop skeptics like Randi. No great scientist can be a pop skeptic, because it starves the brain.

      Being human requires imagination and if you don't invest that imagination with the force of at least some level of belief, then it's too weak to be useful.

      Don't fear irrational beliefs. They are a feature, not a bug. Don't put all your money on a lottery ticket because you saw "1:11" on your clock radio, but it's OK to let the mind go where it wants to go sometimes. Dreams are real. They really happen. Inspiration is real. It really happens. There is a lot of room between wearing your thoughts and impulses like a pair of comfortable baggy pants and becoming a superstitious fool or a Scientologist.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    21. Re:Baloney by NeverSuchBefore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Believing you are infallible and immune to this IS magical thinking.

      Is believing you can read minds magical thinking? You know, if you just define everything to be X, then it's pretty difficult to get away from X. Your conclusion will be pretty difficult to disprove. This is the case here. Absolutely everything is being defined as "magical thinking." Including ridiculous things like figures of speech.

      I don't know if I'm "infallible" to "magical thinking," but I don't like the "I can read your mind" vibe I'm getting from some comments here.

    22. Re:Baloney by narcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Theism is about belief. Gnosticism is about knowledge. You can be an agnostic atheist, agnostic theist, gnostic atheist, or a gnostic theist.

      The parent did confuse knowledge and beliefs. Saying "I don't believe any gods exist" is the same as saying "I believe that no gods exist" -- What he's trying to say is that he's not asserting knowledge about his belief. He doesn't believe that any gods exist but makes no positive claim about the nonexistence of gods. Consequently, he's an agnostic atheist.

    23. Re:Baloney by RKBA · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wow - you *are* magical. For most of us, they stop working right when we get close to them.

      When the wife of a friend walked by a clock on the fireplace mantel, the clock fell off the mantel-place and broke. She did not touch the clock. She believes she has a "magical effect" on certain things because of an aura that surrounds her.

      On the other hand, the clock was a wall clock that was precariously balanced on the mantel-place and she weighs about 350 pounds.

    24. Re:Baloney by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...an aura that surrounds her...she weighs about 350 pounds.

      Gravity? :-P

    25. Re:Baloney by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't seem to understand the boundaries of "magical thinking". Optimism, empathy and dreams are not magical thinking.

    26. Re:Baloney by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think people are confusing magical thinking with magical belief.

      In the context of TFA.
      Magical thinking - all of us have evolved wetware that automatically assigns personalities to inanimate objects.
      Magical belief - some of us believe those personalities are real.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  2. I don't believe in magic by siddesu · · Score: 5, Funny

    I believe that sufficiently advanced technology exists that will manifest itself on time to help me. So, I'm, like, totally rational.

  3. That;s not what the evidence says by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IT says the people have a natural predisposition toward accepting the unknown and putting it into a little box, and confusing Correlation with causality.

    But you can develop skills to ward against it

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. Re:So? by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Indeed not—but it does mean we need to change our rhetoric towards the unenlightened. "This whole 'god' thing was nice for all those thousands years and all that we kept re-inventing religion, but it's time to move on from old instincts; you're smart enough to grow beyond that system of social control" comes across a lot more pleasantly than "you're stupid and you should reject everything that you believe because it's all made-up trash."

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  5. Bias must be recognized to be corrected for. by Greg+Merchan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People also prefer people like themselves. Unchecked this can turn into an unrecognized racism, a common bias. Bolstered it can become the ideological racism most people abhor.

  6. Also, bullshit. by denzacar · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thus speaketh Matthew Hutson:

    And in nearly every country around the world, the percentage of self-described atheists is only in the single digits.

    Which is bullshit. And lies.

    And to top that off, he is using the current date (at the time) to peddle this nonsense and his book through the "article" above.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  7. Re:So? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's impossible to persuade most of religious people no matter what you do. The only realistic way to get rid of religion is to prevent religious people from infecting the next generation and waiting for the current one to die off.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  8. Re:"Humans can't help it" by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and human minds are engineered to be molded by our culture.

    See what you did there?

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
  9. Madness stronger than Rationality by Guppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Forgive me for posting anonymously. I have some comments I'd like to make, but for practical reasons I'd rather not attach my name.

    I am a graduate-level student who has been a life-long agnostic, pretty close to an atheist. Last year, I began hanging out with a Christian religious group. At first it was for the free food (which is excellent, much better in quality and quantity than any other organization on campus I've tried. Apparently they get funding from Christian donors), but over time I've come to enjoy the companionship and philosophical discussions -- I just have to sit through the occasional anti-abortion presentation and such. I make no effort to hide my religious stance, and to them, I have become something of the "token disbeliever" in the group.

    To me, religion is irrational, verging on madness. But what I have come to realize is that their "madness" is stronger than our rationality. Compared to their peers, they are more likely to form relationships and to marry -- it's how eHarmony manages such high levels of marriage out of their dating arrangements (try signing up for their service and identify yourself as an agnostic or atheist, and see how far you get through the vetting process). Their strong bonds allow them to coordinate effectively and gather/distribute resources (like the donor network that funds their free food), allowing them to host events and bring in speakers at a much more often than that of other student organizations, including some really big-shot speakers on non-religious topics that have drawn quite a few listeners from outside their group. They network very effectively, forming relationships with Christians they bring on-campus, including some rather highly accomplished individuals (think CEO-level) who serve as mentors.

    It would offend them for me to say that Religion was invented (or worse, to say it memetically evolved), but increasingly I can see the benefits for why it would have been so. I still can't force myself to Believe, but at this point, I am seriously considering converting sheer practical benefits (hence why I'm posting anonymously).

    1. Re:Madness stronger than Rationality by sixtyeight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      what I have come to realize is that their "madness" is stronger than our rationality. ... Compared to their peers, they are more likely to form relationships and to marry. ... Their strong bonds allow them to coordinate effectively and gather/distribute resources. ... They network very effectively.

      Worker ants have been very successful for similar reasons. Would you want to be one, though?

      No, I'm not assaulting Christians there. But adopting the lifestyle of a group to which you consider yourself a non-member does seem a little insincere and amoral if you're doing it for material benefits. At that point, it becomes only a matter of how low you're willing to go. I understand there are some very satisfied people out there who's lifestyle is based on performing oral sex acts in exchange for freebase cocaine. What I'm suggesting is that if the method you've described is really how you see yourself, go ahead and do so - but know that it is, and know why it is, too. If you do something that isn't who you really are, the results are only going to be disappointing for you - it's a sort of hidden cost involved in the choice. And if it is who you really are, understanding why it is - and to what extent - can enable you to maximize the choice and increase your degree of satisfaction. There's no sense in stopping at mere free food for instance, when there are plenty of motivated drug dealers near you with whom you could form mutually-satisfying relationships.

      --
      The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
  10. Conundrum... by anubi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, here's the puzzle I face...

    Its my senses...and what mathematical and physics I take to be true.

    I observe the complexity of biochemistry. The physics of life astounds me..

    A reading of "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe cemented my beliefs. Francis Collins' "The Language of God: a Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief" gave me what I consider undeniable evidence for belief in a creation - and a creator ( God ).

    The "Big Bang Theory" reeks of "let there be light" to me. My knowledge of thermodynamics - especially the concept of entropy - tells me the Universe, left to its own, should run down.

    In short, everything I see seems to demand a creator.

    Whatever this is... its big... and nothing like me - I have way too many constraints and way too little intelligence - I can barely scrape up enough stuff to even have a belief, much less explain just how this stuff around me came to be.

    Now, here's the rub... I have taken much flak for this.

    The most compelling evidence I have, by far, that God is nothing more than a figment of the imagination.. superstition.. a "palm reader" for the gullible. A moneymaking plan.... comes from people who profess to know God!

    As a scientist type, insanely curious, it drives me up the wall to see the wonders I do, then communicate to what I consider superstitious palm reader types whose prime function seems to be erecting toll booths on the "highway to heaven" to collect tithes. They get to rocking back and forth in the pulpit, one hand wagging in the air like some Hitler scene, and the other gripping the microphone so he can just about swallow the thing - and that forced pious look on their faces,. and I am supposed to take them seriously?

    This is worshipping God? It looks more like a bunko scheme to me. They get a bunch of people worked up in a fervent frenzy reminiscent of a pyramid meeting, then pass the plate. If they could not hide behind "freedom of religion", I am sure they would all be facing bunko charges of defrauding the public like a bunch of gypsy fortunetellers.

    Their favorite chant seems to center on whether I place my belief in science or God. I tell them there is no difference. God is Truth, and the whole purpose of science is to reveal/discover that which is true.

    My tagline for years has displayed my belief. Its THEM I have little confidence in.

    Maybe I worship the God of truth through study of his work ( scientifically ) and they worship Him by throwing parties in his name at someone else's expense,

    I am one confused puppy.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    1. Re:Conundrum... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In short, everything I see seems to demand a creator.

      I don't think this is an indefensible belief on your part, necessarily... although you should read some Dawkins, perhaps, to balance the Behe.

      Collins is an interesting case, as a prominent scientist who doesn't feel compelled to hide his religion the way most of the rest of us non-scientists have to hide our atheism. He's told the story of his own epiphany... but what he's never explained is why it led him to the specific god of Abraham, rather than to simple Deism. He encountered a frozen tripartite waterfall, and he somehow instantly connected enough dots to draw the Holy Trinity. Is this the act of a rational human being, much less a scientist responsible for helping us understand the way life works? It seems that Francis Collins trusts his own perceptions far more than any scientist should.

      Maybe I worship the God of truth through study of his work ( scientifically ) and they worship Him by throwing parties in his name at someone else's expense

      It's one thing to carry a Deist's admiration for the architect of all creation, even if that architect can be described as a God of the Gaps. The Universe does not owe us an accounting of itself, and it's safe to say that there are weirder things out there than our observations will ever reveal to us. One could potentially consider the existence of the Universe to be the result of a conscious act of creation, and apply the term "god" to the creator. At no point will science ever be able to contradict such an outlook.

      But buying into the specifics of the Judeo-Christian faith? Buying into hundreds of pages of demonstrable bullshit written by a Bronze Age tribe of nomadic goat-herders? Buying into the idea that the god of creation, omniscient and infinite, who dwells outside all space and time, was disappointed because somebody once rejected him in favor of a talking snake, and wants me to vote Republican?

      I can't see that as anything other than wishful thinking at best, and psychosis at worst. Religion as we know it today is arguably a mental illness that threatens all of civilization. It seems clear that a lot of smart people are going to have to waste a lot of valuable time figuring out how to stop it. Ultimately, what side of the line do you want to stand on?

  11. Magical thinking by Translation+Error · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know what--I realized magical thinking really can help people. No, I'm not talking about the contents of the article, but the headline made me think of the often-dismissed placebo. A person takes something with absolutely no medicinal value and his condition actually improves simply because he thinks it should! Just by thinking a certain way, someone can improve his health, and not solely within the limits of feeling less pain.

    All the time, I hear 'oh, it's only the placebo effect', but have people considered how incredible that effect really is? Personally, I have to say, if there's anything that might make me consider that there is such a thing as 'magic' in the world, the placebo effect just might be it.

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  12. Those who never believe in "Magic" ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... are the same one who never experience any "Magical Moment" in their lives

    I'll only say this --- I feel sad for them

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  13. confused by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Author seems confused about evolutionary history vs. present usefulness.

    Most who research these topics are well aware of why the known human shortcomings have developed - namely that they were evolutionary useful under specific circumstances. Our preference of false positives over false negatives is certainly a survival trait if the price of a false positive is a short moment of fear while the price of a false negative is being eaten by a lion.

    But that doesn't mean these traits are still of advantage today, in the context of a modern world.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org