Last month, I discussed four strategies for promoting “factfulness” so that we make reasoned judgements. To mitigate against the sway of false propaganda and fake news, we can further expand our cognitive toolkit.
In their book, Factfulness , Hans, Ola and Anna Rosling caution us that fear and facts don’t abide together. Our “fear instinct” is duly exploited by traditional and social media. For example, in 2016, 10 planes crashed and were reported by press, the world over. However, the media doesn’t state that these were 10 of 40 million flights that landed without incident that year. In fact, 2016 was the “second safest year in aviation history.” But, alas, that doesn’t get reported. So, when you are not in any immediate danger but your alarm bells chime, don’t blindly submit to your fears. Assess your risks when you are calmer.
Be wary of numbers, big or small, presented in isolation. Ask for baselines so that you have something to compare the figures with. Amounts and rates can “tell different stories.” As a rule of thumb, comparing rates may be wiser, especially with groups of varying sizes.
Clarity, a must
We also have a penchant for drawing generalisations. The Roslings advocate that you “look for differences within and similarities across groups” as the categories we draw in the first place may be faulty. Further, when we hear the term majority, we assume it implies “most people.” But statistically, majority could range from 51% to 99% of the group. Actual percentages provide more clarity.
The “destiny instinct,” compels us to assume that “innate characteristics” determine the future of people and countries alike. This belief is akin to what psychologist Carol Dweck calls a “fixed mindset,” that doesn’t allow for individuals, groups, cultures or countries to change in substantial ways. Many people believe that women from certain religious denominations have more children than others. The Roslings, however, point out that very poor women, across religious groups, tend to have more children. As incomes rise, women from all religions have smaller families. Before ascribing a particular trait to an individual or group, examine contextual factors that contribute to a phenomenon. Note that gradual changes may result in profound shifts over time.
Humans also prefer simple solutions, which the Roslings call our “single perspective instinct.” However, most real-world problems are far too complex for straightforward solutions. Examine problems from multiple lenses to get a holistic and accurate picture. Critique your own solutions and scrutinise your arguments for weaknesses.
We also single out individuals or groups who can be blamed for problems. Our tendency to blame constricts our thinking as we then don’t pay heed to other factors that may be contributing to a problem. To overcome this propensity, look for systemic causes rather than pointing fingers at people.
Finally, we need to curb our impulsivity and fondness for quick-fixes. To minimise our “urgency instinct,” pause and assess situations instead of responding on the fly. By following these prescriptions, we can “develop factful ways of thinking” and avoid falling prey to distorting human frailties.
The writer is Director, PRAYATNA. arunasankara@gmail.com
