Professional Documents
Culture Documents
faith in your memory than you would in the conclusions drawn from a small (or
biased) sample.
The first two rules on Sutherlands list (searching for evidence against your beliefs
and avoiding distorting new evidence) are probably rules I break constantly. Perhaps
not when reading up on the placebo effect, but certainly in other circumstances.
Heres where this skeptic has most recently caught himself out: I watch my local
football team and found myself complaining bitterly about other teams bullying us
on the field by committing clear fouls which are ignored by the referee.
Being interested in irrationality, and having previously commented elsewhere on the
irrationality of football fans, I wondered for a moment whether my views were
coloured by failing to seek out contradictory evidence due to a bias toward the home
team.
I set out to consciously look out for examples of home and opposition centre halves
fouling opposing players and was a little surprised to find that, actually, the home
players committed roughly as many unpunished fouls as the opposition players.
Thats the thing about irrationality you have to be aware of it in order to guard
against it. You have to, for example, force yourself to look for contradictory evidence,
and you must ensure that you do not distort it if and when you find it.
My irrationality in this case may have been more available to me than it would be in
other areas. My being interested in irrationality and aware of the irrationality of sports
fans may have made it easier for me to spot my irrational view of events on the field.
What can we do to avoid falling into irrationality so often? I would guess that being
more aware of the likelihood of doing so may help. Perhaps we should all read
Sutherlands Irrationality once a year simply to remind ourselves of what irrational
creatures we really are?