Discovering an error in thinking is GOOD

[jack]

Most of us have many sweeping errors and assumptions buried in our heads, formed from upbringing or generalisations or assumptions or even something that was correct at the time, that haven't really been subjected to close scrutiny since they were formed. That includes factual errors, assumptions about groups of people, etc, etc.

If you never say "oh, I was wrong about that, even though it's quite important", it's possible that you're just always right, but more likely that you're too stubborn to admit when you're wrong. (The opposite error is to be too flexible, and always agree with new ideas, but never stick to them. However, I think most people I know are quite good at changing their mind when they come to see they have to, but embarrassed to admit they were wrong before.)

Examples of things that I'm completely mortified to remember I used to think would be: "dowsing works", "tories are evil", "being gay isn't bad but not something anyone I know is likely to ever actually do", "I'm boring and will never have any friends." I really wish I'd been perfect from birth, but I have to say, I really, really wasn't, and probably nor is anyone else :)

The point I'm trying to make is that when you realise you've been fundamentally wrong about something, especially something very very fundamental, crack open the champagne! It's much more likely to represent reducing the number of fundamental errors you have, rather than discovering you have more than you think.

(You get double-credit if it's a mistake most people in your immediate/national social group share, and half-credit if it's one they already knew and told you about :))

It's certainly very embarrassing to admit. We'd all like to be perfect. But only be embracing improvement can we be more right, not be criticizing people who admit they were wrong. I know, it seems obvious when put like that, but most people are reluctant to admit non-prevalent beliefs, even in rejecting them, and often for good reason.

Comments

[sunflowerinrain]

Oh! Hm.

What a good bit of thinking this is :)

[jack]

*hugs* Aw, thank you.

I can't remember what sparked it most recently, but it originally came from a realisation that someone was embarrassed to do something they'd always thought they wouldn't like to, and rather than tease them, I realised I should be lauding them :)

It's a bit reminiscent of Less Wrong (but hopefully perhaps less browbeaty!)

[rmc28]

Thank you for putting it so well.

I shall admit I was wrong more often ;)

[jack]

*hugs* Aw, thank you.

[onyxlynx]

But--but tories are evil!

(Wait, are we talking tory as in Tory, the conservative party in Parliament, or tory as in Tori Amos? Because at the moment, I cannot think of anything in which there is even the slightest chance that the Tories would share any opinion with me, including the wetness of water. I am not, however, British, and may be making American-style assumptions; our conservatives are evil.)

[nanaya]

Well, there's a range of opinions among Tories, both party members and professional politicians. But assuming party affiliation = evil is a bit of a huge assumption.

[onyxlynx]

Well, yes. Most of the time I try not to make it, despite many party members' best efforts to convince me that they are. (It's a bit of a "conservatives, eeewwwwwww" thing with me mostly, and British conservatives as I understand it would cause American conservatives to scream "Communists!" a lot.)

[jack]

:) But I mean, yes, that's roughly what I've given up, right down to the phrasing and tone of voice :)

I think there's many truly horrendous things which happen, promulgated by many people on but are noticeably incorporated into fringes of the Republican party, but:

(a) even for people who DO hold utterly abhorrent views, I would still rather not say they themselves are evil, because that precludes any sort of understanding where they're coming from. Half of America thinks and says things that might be beyond the pale in my social group, but fostering an us-and-them attitude (even if I'm right and they're wrong :)) won't help resolve that.

(b) And there are many views which I might disagree with but are not as ridiculously abhorrent as the ones I was referring to in (a). The republican party contains lots of people and many of them are, even though they're not always the first thing to spring to mind -- genuinely honest, brave, sensible, intelligent and well-meaning

(c) Indeed, you can't map names of parties, or even concepts of parties, reliably between countries. The conservative party[1] in the UK is on the right[2] of UK politics, but UK politics as a whole is left of America. I've heard it said that an appropriate mapping might be the conservative party to the democrat party, with the republicans and labour sitting off the ends. That's a gross simplification and exaggeration, but probably has more truth than equating them left-left and right-right. For instance, there's lots of things that everyone and all political parties in the UK assume we want to keep, such as a national health service, which (I assume) would give you something in common with the conservative party (and indeed, even with the extreme-right, like the BNP[3])[4].

(d) As balancedly as I can be, I assume disagree with the conservative party more than with labour and with lib-dem, but to be fair I expect the two big parties probably have about the same proportion of hideous gaffes I can't bring myself to vote for (even if my upbringing biases me one way).

(e) I definitely have friends who support the conservative party, and are compassionate and intelligent. (I sometimes feel that party affiliation can more represent the route you took to get to a sensible place, than the place you ended up.) And the same for all sorts of other groups I find it easy to forget are included. So I don't want to cavelierly dismiss any group, and I really, really don't want to do so to their face.

[1] Which people derogatively/affectionately refer to as tories, even though there are historical quibbles with that

[2] Not the extreme loony right, but the right of the three main parties.

[3] The two party system is slightly less entrenched here, so some strands which would be jostling for position in one of the major parties in the US here would have their own party.

[4] Some European parties show an even more edifying contrast to the US. For instance, in the Dutch parliament, the "has a problem with gay marriage" meme is confined to a tiny but reliable centre-right religious party, but all the major parties, and all the extreme left and extreme right and extreme loony parties support it as a matter of course. In Europe may political parties have "socialist" as part of the name, and get elected and run countries. (Although the meaning has evolved over time, as in America it seems to have come to mean "evil".)

[onyxlynx]

Oh, yes.

Thank you for the clarity.

Some days I get So Damned Mad... Most of the time, I know this. I even know the history (although I still maintain that the fear of Socialism in the US amounts to a phobia, and one of these days I will find out why). Just the outrages lately are...outrageous.

But yes, your situation is Different (I read The Sideshow ;-)).

[jack]

I did laugh when I read your post, when it's seductive is the time to MOST resist prejudices.

[onyxlynx]

Thank you!

Trying...

(Very.)

[naath]

I think the Tories agree with me about the wetness of water :-) But also important things like the value of health-care-for-all (even if we disagree about how to implement that). The kind of moral splits the US has like arguments about abortion and gay marriage are much less left/right split here - there are many socially progressive Tories as well as socially conservative Labour/LD types.