4,618
edits
Social Studies skills: Difference between revisions
m
→Confirmation bias
m (→Causality) |
|||
| (12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 423: | Line 423: | ||
=== Economic disparity === | === Economic disparity === | ||
* | * a measure of disparities in income distribution across an economic unit or country | ||
* Thomas Picketty | ** i.e., the extent to which income is distributed equally or unequally | ||
** ex. high economic dispary means that a small percentage of a country controls a high percentage of that country's assets or economic activity | |||
* see [[wikipedia:Gini_coefficient|Gini coefficient - Wikipedia]] | |||
* see Thomas Picketty / todo | |||
* problems include | |||
** while a certain segment of a population may control a significant portion of assets, it may not also constitute a disproportionate amount of economic activity | |||
** government dispersals of or redistribution of income may hide underlying economic disparities in standards of living, purchasing power, etc. | |||
==Order & Chaos== | ==Order & Chaos== | ||
| Line 876: | Line 882: | ||
* see also | * see also | ||
** [https://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique-1-2015-2-page-203.htm The discovery of the comparative advantage theory (on James Mill, 1821)] | ** [https://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique-1-2015-2-page-203.htm The discovery of the comparative advantage theory (on James Mill, 1821)] | ||
=== Desire Path === | |||
[[File:Desire path - 52849400711.jpg|thumb|right|A desire path between concrete sidewalks at the Ohio State University (wikipedia)]] | |||
* specifically: a path created by people off or outside of an established, planned path | |||
* generally: the idea that people will more efficiently choose their methods and means of conducting day-to-day affairs better than planners | |||
** related to Frederick Hayeks' idea of the "emergent order" created by accumulated individual decisions rather than by a collective decision | |||
=== Economies of scale === | === Economies of scale === | ||
| Line 892: | Line 904: | ||
* Hayek | * Hayek | ||
** dispersed knowledge | ** dispersed knowledge | ||
** emergent order | ** emergent order/ spontaneous order | ||
* Locke | * Locke | ||
* Smith | * Smith | ||
| Line 916: | Line 928: | ||
* see [https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil/ I, Pencil by Leonard E. Read - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)] | * see [https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil/ I, Pencil by Leonard E. Read - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)] | ||
=== Herbert Stein's | === Herbert Stein's law === | ||
* "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" | * "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" | ||
* in economics and history, this concept is important for students to appreciate | * in economics and history, this concept is important for students to appreciate | ||
| Line 925: | Line 937: | ||
** example: why did such-and-such policy fail over time? | ** example: why did such-and-such policy fail over time? | ||
** source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein | ** source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein | ||
* Stein's law is an expression of "Regression to the Mean" (see entry) | |||
=== Jevons paradox === | === Jevons paradox === | ||
| Line 1,141: | Line 1,154: | ||
* origins of the idea of confirmation bias | * origins of the idea of confirmation bias | ||
** Aesop's fable: Fox and the Grapes, which is where we get the expression, "sour grapes" ("oh well, those grapes are probably sour") | ** Aesop's fable: Fox and the Grapes, which is where we get the expression, "sour grapes" ("oh well, those grapes are probably sour") | ||
*David Hume and confirmaton bias | |||
* David Hume | |||
** 18th century Scottish philosopher who argued that knowledge is derived from experience (called "empiricism") | ** 18th century Scottish philosopher who argued that knowledge is derived from experience (called "empiricism") | ||
** however, Hume warned against reason alone as the basis for knowledge, as one can "reason" just about anything | ** however, Hume warned against reason alone as the basis for knowledge, as one can "reason" just about anything | ||
| Line 1,153: | Line 1,160: | ||
** Hume warned against jumping to conclusions based on limited knowledge | ** Hume warned against jumping to conclusions based on limited knowledge | ||
*** i.e. drawing conclusions based on our own confirmation bias | *** i.e. drawing conclusions based on our own confirmation bias | ||
* may also be called "motivated reasoning" | |||
** i.e. drawing conclusions ("reasoning") based upon bias or reason for ("motives") | |||
* see: | |||
** [http://www.devpsy.org/teaching/method/confirmation_bias.html Confirmation Bias & Wason (1960) 2-4-6 Task (devpsy.org)] | |||
** [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/seeing-what-others-dont/201905/the-curious-case-of-confirmation-bias The Curious Case of Confirmation Bias | Psychology Today] | |||
==== historical examples of confirmation bias ==== | |||
*in 1938, British Prime Minister Chamberlain returned from Germany after signing the Munich Agreement, under which Hitler agreed not to many further claims on Czechsolvakian territory (after siezing the Sudetenland), and announced that the agreement would bring "peace for our time." | |||
**within six months Germany had annexed more of Czechoslavia and would soon after invade Poland. | |||
**Chamberlain and his allied nations so wanted Hitler not to be a problem that they accepted anything he proposed thinking that appeasing him would stop his agression. | |||
*the Salem Witch Trials of 1692 were driven by confirmation bias that considered evidence gave proof of witchcraft, and even otherwise harmless things, like a broken fence, served as proof of it. | |||
**Worse, authorities accepted without question ridiculous claims such as that a witch supposedly made cows jump | |||
*The New Testament tells of various miracles performed by Jesus, some of which occur on the sabbath, which is the Hebrew "day of rest" (no work is allowed) | |||
**when some of the Jewish leaders, "Pharisees," witness a miracle, instead of responding in awe of it (such as healing a cripple or giving sight to a blind man), they become upset that Jesus performed the miracle on the sabbath | |||
***basically, saying, "Yeah, whatever, you healed a dude, but you can't do that on a Saturday!" | |||
**the bias of the Pharisees was so strong that they ignored the miracle and instead accused Jesus of breaking the law by "working" on the sabbath | |||
=== Correlation is not causation === | === Correlation is not causation === | ||
* a cause and effect fallacy that mistakes "correlation" for cause | * a cause and effect fallacy that mistakes "correlation" for cause | ||
| Line 1,598: | Line 1,621: | ||
* the Dunning-Kruger effect is observable but not provable | * the Dunning-Kruger effect is observable but not provable | ||
** i.e., it can happen but just because someone does not have competence does not mean that person will draw hasty, broad and wrong conclusions | ** i.e., it can happen but just because someone does not have competence does not mean that person will draw hasty, broad and wrong conclusions | ||
=== Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) === | |||
[[File:Elaboration Likelihood Model Information Graphic of Bias and Objective Thinking.jpg|thumb|Elaboration Likelihood Model Information Graphic of Bias and Objective Thinking. Peripheral Route is to the left ("biased") and Central Route to the right ("ojbective")]] | |||
* identifies the association between persuasion and bias | |||
* "elaboration" means the extent to which a person engages in objective mental processing before making a decision or adopting a point of view | |||
* ELM shows that much persuasion is driven by perceptions of status | |||
** i.e. high or low status perceptions drive people's attitudes towards persuasion | |||
* ELM identifies two paths to persuasion or "attitude change": | |||
*# high-elaboration likelihood, called "Central Route" = motivated to engage the argument with critical thought open to evidence | |||
*# low-elaboration likelihood, called "Peripheral Route" = external cues or influences are present that shape reception to the argument without critical thought | |||
* the "Central Route" requires intellectual honesty and engagement | |||
* the "Peripheral Route" engages biases and emotional states and yields little critical thought | |||
** related to confirmation bias and [[logical fallacy]] | |||
* the "Route" taken at any given time is related to a person's self-perceived social status or that of the source of the argument or information (or persuation) | |||
** that is, people process arguments or new information according to their perception of the source of that argument or information | |||
** also called "prestige bias" | |||
* "Motivation" strongly impacts the "Route" taken by the recipient of the information/ persuasion (i.e., decision-maker) | |||
** motivation = conditions, desires, perspectives, or states of mind that influence a decision | |||
** thus motivation may engage biases and thus the "Peripheral Route" | |||
* see | |||
** [[wikipedia:Elaboration_likelihood_model|Elaboration likelihood model - Wikipedia]] | |||
** [https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/how-dumb-ideas-capture-smart-and Why Dumb Ideas Capture Smart and Successful People] | |||
*** also published here: [https://clips.cato.org/sites/default/files/cato_quillette_Prestige.pdf Persuasion and the Prestige Paradox: Are High Status People More Likely to Lie?] | |||
** [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/after-service/202105/do-the-most-educated-people-look-down-everyone-else Do the Most Educated People Look Down on Everyone Else? | Psychology Today] | |||
=== Entropy === | === Entropy === | ||
| Line 1,722: | Line 1,770: | ||
** the "frame" guides the audience to that "point of view" | ** the "frame" guides the audience to that "point of view" | ||
* also called '''"spinning"''', which is to "spin" or redirect a negative into a positive | * also called '''"spinning"''', which is to "spin" or redirect a negative into a positive | ||
=== Prestige bias / Prestige paradox === | |||
* also called "myside bias" (a form of confirmation bias) | |||
* the idea that perceptions of status drive people's attitudes and decision making | |||
* it is a "paradox" is because people with self-perceived "high status" are less likely to think objectively (without bias) | |||
** because "high status" people are "preoccupied with how others perceive them" | |||
* see [https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/how-dumb-ideas-capture-smart-and Why Dumb Ideas Capture Smart and Successful People] | |||
** also published here: [https://clips.cato.org/sites/default/files/cato_quillette_Prestige.pdf Persuasion and the Prestige Paradox: Are High Status People More Likely to Lie?] | |||
=== Rorschach test === | === Rorschach test === | ||
| Line 1,794: | Line 1,851: | ||
* | * | ||
== Other theories & conceptual tools == | == Other theories & conceptual tools == | ||
=== | |||
=== Glasl's model of conflict escalation === | |||
[[File:Glasl's Model of Conflict Escalation.svg|thumb|Glasl's "Nine stages of conflict escalation"|385x385px]] | |||
* when analyzing conflict, diplomacy, events, etc. students may employ the conceptual framework of "conflict escalation" by Friedrich Glasl ([[wikipedia:Friedrich_Glasl's_model_of_conflict_escalation|here from wikipedia]]) | |||
* Glasl's model divides disagreement or conflict scenarios into "stages" based upon three core outcomes: | |||
** win-win | |||
*** both sides benefit | |||
** win-lose | |||
*** one side benefits, the other loses | |||
** lose-lose | |||
*** conflict w/ bad outcomes for one or both parties | |||
* conflicts escalate through and into: | |||
** tension and dispute | |||
** debate | |||
** communication loss | |||
** coalition building (seeking sympathy or help from others) | |||
** denunciation | |||
** loss of face (pride) | |||
** threats and feelings of threat | |||
** depersonalization (treating the other as not human) | |||
** attack, annihilation, defeat | |||
* deescalation includes: | |||
** mediation from third-party (intercession, intermediation) | |||
** process guidance | |||
** arbitration, legal actions | |||
** forcible intervention, especially from higher power | |||
* Glasl's model works at the individual (a family fight) or global level (international affairs) | |||
=== Graham's hierarchy of disagreement === | |||
[[File:Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement-en.svg|thumb|Graham's hierarchy of disagreement]] | |||
* tech entrepreneur Paul Graham in 2008 proposed a model for levels (hierarchies) of disagreement | |||
* the top of the hierarchy is refutation of the "central point" | |||
** i.e., that the opposing idea is fundamentally "refuted" | |||
*** via logic, demonstration, evidence, etc. | |||
* the bottom of the hierarchy is "Name-calling", which leads to no resolution and further anger or dispute | |||
* key points in the negative side of the hierarchy are essentially [[Logical fallacy|logical fallacies]]: | |||
** name-calling (ad hominem) and | |||
** criticism of tone or attitude rather than substance ("responding to tone") | |||
** contractions without evidence | |||
* on the constructive side are | |||
** strong argument via reason, logic, evidence | |||
** refutation: proof | |||
=== Overton Window === | |||
* [[File:Overton Window diagram.svg|thumb|An illustration of the Overton window, along with Treviño's degrees of acceptance]]Joseph Overton observed that along the spectrum of social or political thought, policy, or opinion | |||
** there exists a mainstream "middle" of consensus | |||
*** that middle may have variances, but most people generally agree with it | |||
** with extremes on both sides that are not generally accepted | |||
** however, as one extreme or the other becomes acceptable, they enter into the "Overton Window" | |||
** example: | |||
*** in the 1950s, rock music was considered anti-social, thus lay outside of the Overton Window | |||
*** as its popularity grew, especially following Elvis Presley, rock music became popular music | |||
**** and thus, entered the Overton Window | |||
* in the Overton Window, "Policy" should reflect a consensus of points of view within the window, and will move according to changes within that window | |||
** so, while "Policy" may not always reflect the middle of the Window, it acts to reflect changes in the window. | |||
=== Weber's "Protestant Work Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism" === | === Weber's "Protestant Work Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism" === | ||
* Social Scientist Max Weber attributed the economic success of U.S. and northwestern European nations to their dominant "Protestant work ethic" | |||
* based on | |||
** individualism and notions of self-sufficiency | |||
** ethics of hard work, timeliness, frugality, etc. | |||
*** that cumulatively yielded productive economies and a dominant middle class | |||
* note that Weber's seen today by "critical race" theorists as elements of "white privilege" | |||
==External Resources== | ==External Resources== | ||