Confirmation Bias

Justice Amy Coney-Barrett is clearly an accomplished, bright, and articulate juror.  I don’t happen to agree with her conservative interpretation of constitutional law.  However, partisan shenanigans aside, she was a worthy appointment to the Supreme Court.

During her confirmation hearing, she responded to the Senators' questions with sound legal theory and reasoning. But from a psychological perspective, her explanations were nonsense.  She was trying to sell the idea that Supreme Court cases are decided objectively, guided by philosophic principle, each case decided on its own merits.  Not so.

Human behavior is hard to predict.  But I believe that a Supreme Court justice’s vote can be predicted with at least 90% accuracy.  After all, no one is surprised when a ‘liberal’ judge votes liberally or when a ‘conservative’ judge votes conservatively.  However, when Chief Justice Roberts voted with the liberals on an Affordable Care Act case, some were pleasantly surprised, but others were shocked and dismayed.  The liberal judges weren’t criticized for voting liberally.  The conservative judges weren’t criticized for voting conservatively.  That’s what everyone expected. But when Judge Roberts did not vote with the conservatives, as predicted, he was roundly criticized.  His vote, in that case, was the exception that proves the rule.

If each court case was really decided objectively, only upon its own merits, then the outcome could never be so predictable.  Something else is going on.  That something else is, in psychological terms, called confirmation bias.

Psychologically, we often don’t base our beliefs upon facts, we find facts compatible with our beliefs. We often don't make decisions based upon facts, we find facts that support our decisions. Simultaneously, we deny, ignore, or dispute any contradictory facts. 

I assume that each of the Supreme Court justices are the best of the best jurists.  I assume that cases brought to the court are highly complex, often ambiguous, with many facts and precedents to consider, and with compelling arguments presented from both sides.

In complex court cases, being considered by the best of minds, each judge must review many facts, often contradictory facts. Then, if I am correct (and I am), they base their judicial opinions on the facts that best conform to their biases.  Conversely, they deny, ignore, or dispute any facts that may seem contradictory.  There is no such entity as a judge that is objective and without bias.  That’s just not human psychology. If you know where a Supreme Court judge is on the political spectrum, then you know how the Supreme Court judge will vote, at least 90% of the time.

Ironically, confirmation bias seems to have a double meaning. I didn’t need the recent Senate confirmation hearings to know how each of the Senators would vote.  Senators selected or ignored facts, as the facts did or did not conform to their biases, but facts never changed a single vote. The votes, for or against Judge Coney-Barrett’s confirmation, were preordained. The confirmation hearing was nonsense, a waste of time and energy.  I can confirm that, without bias.

Americans

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."  (George Santayana, 1863-1952)

“Un-American.”  That’s what a T.V. commentator called the 70-million Trump voters.  I disagree.  That would be like saying that the throngs of adoring Germans were ‘un-German’ as they stood shoulder to shoulder in pre-war Nuremberg square shouting “Seig Heil!” To the contrary, they were very German.  They stood there able to overlook the lies and rantings of a charismatic madman, because he promised to make Germany great again.  The German economy was improving. Inflation was contained. The trains ran on time.  The military was rebuilding. After the humiliating World War I surrender, Germany was once again emerging as a major power on the world stage.  The common man, the disaffected and forgotten German citizen, now felt a rising sense of power, purpose, and pride.

German history, German culture, and German literature would be cleansed, decontaminated from the influence of Jews, Socialists, and other undesirables.  Beautiful Aryan children would be taught a new and noble German narrative from an early age.  From Germany would rise a new generation of uber-menschen, supermen.

Socialism, with its global agenda, was the political enemy without and was effectively silenced by brown-shirted thugs. The only significant obstacle between the German people and true greatness on the world stage was the conspiracy of the plotting “international Jew.”

Fast forward to the pre-election MAGA rallies, the mini-Nurembergs, with adoring Trumpers, unmasked, standing shoulder-to-shoulder chanting “lock ‘em up’ or ‘fire Fauci’. Only the stiff-armed salute was missing. The 70-million who voted for Trump are not un-American.  They are very American, a new kind of right-wing conservative American as defined by Trump and endorsed by Hannity and Ingraham and Carlson, by Ted Cruz and Jim Jordan and Lindsey Graham, by Bill Barr and Mike Pompeo, by Mitch McConnell and Mike Pence.

These new Americans scare me.  They promote conspiracy theories, and ignore facts and science.  They rely heavily on insults, threats, and banners, but seem deaf to reason.  They value the Dow Jones, the second amendment, and their inalienable rights, but mock integrity, responsibility, and decency.

What is happening to my country?  Why did 70-milliion citizens vote for Trump?  Why do so many Republicans continue to openly support this sociopathic president, and his unsubstantiated claims of election fraud and conspiracy? Why have so many other Republicans in power been silent? 

Why, in the 1920’s and 30’s, did the arguably most cultured and enlightened of all European nations embrace the falsehoods and conspiracy theories of the lunatic Hitler?  Because he made the trains run on time?  Because he made Germany great again?  Far too many Germans enthusiastically supported Hitler.  Too many others remained silent, and we know the consequences.

American is not Germany, Donald Trump is not Hitler, and The Art of the Deal is not Mein Kampf. But human nature and mob psychology are the same, then and now. Trump is petty, vindictive, powerful, and dangerous.  He lost the election. And yet far too many Republicans, good Americans who know this to be true, remain silent. Do they not remember the past?

Darth

 “Woe, who say “good” to evil and “evil” to good . . .”   (Isaiah, 5:20) 

I am a registered independent voter.  Often in the past I voted a split ticket.  I admit, there were even a few elections where I did not vote.  Come hell or high water or Covid, I will vote in this election.

Often, in past elections, I voted ambivalently, for whomever I felt to be the lesser of two evils.  Not this election.  This election is a choice between evil and not-evil, the force of darkness versus the force of light, Darth Vader versus Mr. Rogers.  Darth, surrounded by his all-white heavily-armed storm troopers.  Mr. Rogers, sometimes boring, sometimes hard to listen to, but empathetic, trustworthy, wanting us to get along and to be neighborly.

I struggle to understand the millions of fans who adore this Darth, and who will never be persuaded otherwise.  Why do some people admire his strutting, his posturing, and his bombast?  Why are so many willing to believe, forget, overlook, or rationalize his flagrant lies?  I can’t wrap my head around those who excuse and forgive his blatant incompetence.  I don’t understand those who seek four more years of his divisive and hate-filled speech, his racism and his support for right-wing white nationalism.

This Darth is undeniably diagnosable. At least three diagnoses from the mental health bible, DSM-5, are accurately descriptive:

·         Paranoid personality disorder is a pattern of distrust and suspiciousness such that others’ motives are interpreted as malevolent.

·         Narcissistic personality disorder is a pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy.

·         Antisocial personality disorder is a pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others.

And, by the way, this current Darth is no stable genius.  He’s not even very bright.  He’s propped up by the Hannity’s, the Ingraham’s and the Carlson’s, FOX commentators who are intelligent and articulate.  But they are ideologues, each one promoting a conservative right-wing agenda. Darth gives them some muscle. In return, they give Darth some credibility. Darth is their convenient and accommodating means to an end.  Each of them is too smart not to detect Darth’s lunacy.  But to an ideologue, any means justifies the end, even if it means supporting lies, deceit, and corruption.

I cringe at the thought that this Darth might win the election.  If he does, I will remember a line from a different story, a different movie, when the world appeared overwhelmed by darkness. “There is some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it’s worth fighting for.”

Never before has my generation feared violence in the aftermath of an election.  Never before has my generation felt so much at stake in one election. Never in my lifetime has democracy seemed so threatened and so fragile. Now, we anxiously wait to see how Darth and his henchmen will try to suppress the vote and subvert the election. 

I brace myself for whatever may occur after November 3rd.  May the force be with us and may the future bring us some beautiful days in the neighborhood.

Do-Overs

As a kid, I used to play baseball and touch-football in the park across from my house.  There was no adult supervision.  There were no referees.  Often there were close plays and disputed calls.  I don’t remember the disputes ever leading to fights.  It never got that serious.  We kept it fun and friendly.  We agreed to do-overs.

I used to golf.  If the course was not too busy and I made a bad shot, I took a mulligan, a do-over. My friends did the same. None of us were competitive golfers.  The do-overs gave us a chance to practice a few extra shots.  It gave us a chance to play the ball from the fairway instead of from the deep rough or two fairways over.  Do-overs made the game less frustrating.

I used to bowl.  Among my friends we had an understanding that, with a gutter ball, we got a do-over.  We could make a mistake and pretend it didn’t happen.  There was a little harmless self-deception going on as we calculated our final scores. Today, with electronic scoring, bowling is not so forgiving. Do-overs are no longer allowed.

When I was in public school, do-overs on tests were not allowed.  A do-over meant having to do the entire grade over. That kind of do-over was serious business, nothing to be desired (so I was told by those in-the-know).  When my children were in public school, they were occasionally allowed do-overs on assignments and exams.  As a parent I questioned that policy.

I used to play chess and other board games with my friends, no do-overs allowed.  However, when I played Connect-4 or other games with kids in the office, I not only allowed do-overs, I encouraged them.  The game was not a competition.  My job was teacher, coach, and therapist.  I wanted to teach kids to slow down, to look carefully at their options, and to learn from their mistakes.

I play poker.  There are no do-overs.

In life, there are limited opportunities for do-overs.  Career do-overs and marriage do-overs are sometimes possible but not easy and not always the best choice.  Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should take a do-over.  A do-over doesn’t guarantee better outcome.  Usually, the lesson learned from a major life do-over is, “wherever I go, there I am.”

As for raising children, there are no do-overs.

With age, there are less chances for do-overs. Instead, there are more what-ifs. Psychologist Erik Erikson said that around age 65 we begin to assess our life, looking back with either a sense of satisfaction or with regret, feeling that life has been worthwhile and well-lived or viewing much of life as squandered and meaningless.  I have a few regrets, mostly trivial.  For the most part, I look back on my life with pride and satisfaction. I don’t need or want a do-over.

Love Letters

It was 6^th grade. My friend Paul and I were looking through old boxes in the basement. We found a stack of love letters my father had written to my mother during World War II.  We were fascinated by the ‘mushy’ parts, laughing quietly as we read them, until my mother discovered what we were up to and put an end to it.

Not so long ago I reread those letters. I transcribed them and arranged them in sequence. I wanted to get a glimpse of my father as a young man. I wanted to construct a narrative of my father’s war experience.  I wanted to understand my parents’ courtship, the months and circumstances immediately preceding their long and often unhappy marriage.

In 1943, my father received his commission as a 2^nd lieutenant and was sent to bombardier school at Lowry Air Force Base in Denver, Colorado.  That’s where he met my mother.  Ninety days later he was transferred from Denver to Euphrata, Washington for B-17 flight training.  That’s where the letters begin.

In December, my father was sent overseas to England with the 8^th Air Force, 91^st division.  Between January and April 1944, he flew 25 missions over France and Germany.  Among his medals, he received the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Purple Heart.

Researching official military records, I found reports from each of my father’s 25 missions, including dates, details of the intended target, the number of airplanes lost, the number of airmen killed, and the number of airmen missing in action.  In his letters, my father did not (and perhaps could not) mention any of the details of these missions.  The most he said was, “It was rough, but don’t worry.” Sometimes, when the missions were particularly difficult, he didn’t write at all.

My father was a Jewish airman fighting against the Nazis.  Strikingly absent from his letters was any mention of Hitler, or Germany, or religion, or country.  The letters expressed no philosophical, political, or patriotic thought. He began each letter “Helen Darling,” and wrote about returning home to the girl he loved.  A few times he added a romantic verse of Robert Burns’ poetry.  Occasionally there was a request for some hard-to-obtain food item. Otherwise he wrote with immaculate penmanship in a tone of resolve and reassurance.

In one of my father’s letters he wrote that there were stories from the war he would one day tell his children.  He never told us those stories.  

Before being sent into combat, my father had known my mother for only a few months.  Was he really writing to my mother or to a fantasy, the girl he needed my mother to be?  Perhaps being in love was my father’s necessary distraction from the horrors of war.  Confronted with a terrifying present, there must have been some comfort imagining a romantic future.

After completing his missions my father was transferred back to the states.  One month later he and my mother were married.

Human Nature

 “The tendency of man’s heart is towards evil from his youth.”  (Genesis 8:21)

I kept a set of wooden building blocks in my office. Watching children play with those blocks I learned much about human nature. 

Watch a young child with a set of blocks, and notice that there is a destructive side of human nature.  A tower built with the blocks is there to be knocked down.  The child will laugh, smile, and wait for you to build the tower again so that it may once again be knocked down.  Notice the child’s delight as the blocks are scattered helter-skelter, the louder the better.

As the child gets a bit older you may notice the child getting into a cycle of stacking blocks, knocking them down, and then stacking anew.  Then comes a time when the child hesitates, stops and looks.  This represents a subtle shift, an internal tension, to knock down or to let stand.  The child now allows the tower to remain erect, adding to it, wanting it to be taller and more elaborate.  You see, beginning to emerge, that there is a creative side of human nature.

Not only does the child admire the now standing tower, but the child seeks out others to notice what has been created.  There is an approval-seeking, praise-seeking side of human nature.

The child will defend their tower from destruction by siblings and other children. If asked by adults to put away the blocks, the child may request that the tower be allowed to remain standing.  There is a possessive and protective side of human nature.

There is a competitive and aggressive side of human nature.  One’s own tower is protected, but another’s tower is looked at with jealousy and envy.  Another builder is a feared rival, especially if the other is a sibling.  The child may want to destroy the tower of their rival.  Parents step in. “You want to knock down your brother’s tower, but you are not allowed to do that.” To live peaceably with others, that child must be taught social rules and constraints.  Nurture must now modify nature. It is okay to have the feelings, but it is not okay to destroy.  Human nature must be kept in check.

With time, the destructive side of human nature will become internally regulated, no longer requiring the external prohibiting parental voice.  But somewhere, deep within, there often remains an echo of that early destructive nature.  There is pleasure in the crash of a Jenga tower falling, the crash of bowling pins scattering, the crash of bumper cars colliding, the crash of bodies playing football, the crash of buildings imploding during demolition.  Fortunately, for most, the destructive side of human nature recedes into the largely unconscious background as the creative side grows and develops.

Watch two children with a set of blocks and they may discover pleasure in sharing, building, and creating cooperatively with one another.  Good news, there is a social and affiliative side to human nature.