others & ourselves
JUDGING OTHERS & OURSELVES
Setting the Stage
The Irrationality of Irrationality The Paradox of Popular Psychology
By Sam McNerney, April 29, 2012
I
the store argued that the conversation that took n 1996, Lyle Brenner, Derek Koehler and place in the store was disruptive. Another group of Amos Tversky conducted a studyinvolving participants – essentially a mock jury – heard both students from San Jose State University and sides. Stanford University. The researchers were interested The key part of the experiment was that the in how people jump to conclusions based on participants were fully aware of the setup; they knew limited information. Previous work by Tversky, that they were only hearing one side or the entire Daniel Kahneman and other psychologists found story. But this didn’t stop the subjects who heard that people are “radically insensitive to both the one-sided evidence from being more confident quantity and quality of information that gives rise to and biased with their judgments than those who impressions and intuitions,” saw both sides. That is, so the researchers knew, of even when people had all course, that we humans don’t ven when people the underlying facts, they do a particularly good job of jumped to conclusions after had all the underlying weighing the pros and cons. hearing only one side of the But to what degree? Just how facts, they jumped to story. bad are we at assessing all the conclusions after hearing facts? The good news is that only one side of the story. Brenner, Koehler and To find out, Brenner and his Tversky found that simply team exposed the students prompting participants to consider the other side’s to legal scenarios. In one, a plaintiff named Mr. story reduced their bias – instructions to consider Thompson visits a drug store for a routine union the missing information was a manipulation in a visit. The store manager informs him that according later study – but it certainly did not eliminate it. to the union contract with the drug store, plaintiffs Their study shows us that people are not only willing cannot speak with the union employees on the to jump to conclusions after hearing only one side’s floor. After a brief deliberation, the manager calls story, but that even when they have additional the police and Mr. Thompson is handcuffed for information at their disposal that would suggest a trespassing. Later the charges were dropped, but Mr. different conclusion, they are still surprisingly likely Thompson is suing the store for false arrest. to do so. The scientists conclude on a somewhat All participants got this background information. pessimistic note: “People do not compensate Then, they heard from one of the two sides’ lawyers; sufficiently for missing information even when it is the lawyer for the union organizer framed the arrest painfully obvious that the information available to as an attempt to intimidate, while the lawyer for them is incomplete.”
“
?
Q
2
uestions to Consider
E
▶▶ Do you feel your judgments on others are objective or biased? ▶▶ Have you ever been in a situation where you judged someone incorrectly? If so, what was it? ▶▶ What steps could we take to judge others more favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
Judging Others ו:פרקי אבות א
. והוי דן את כל האדם לכף זכות, וקנה לך חבר, עשה לך רב:יהושע בן פרחיה אומר
Ethics of Our Fathers, 1:6 Yehoshua Ben Prachia said: Establish for yourself a teacher, acquire for yourself a friend, and judge every individual in a positive light.
פירוש רבינו עובדיה מברטנורא ואין האיש מוחזק לא לכאן, ואפשר לדונו לכף זכות או לכף חובה,כשהדבר שקול , ולא לחשוד אותו חנם שעושה מעשה שלא כהוגן. יש לדונו לכף זכות- ולא לכאן . הוי דן את חבירך לכף זכות- ״בצדק תשפוט עמיתך״:(.שכן דרשו חז״ל )שבועות ל
Commentary of the Bartenura When a situation can be viewed from either perspective, and it is possible to judge either in a positive light or in a negative light, and the person in question does not have a reputation in either direction [i.e. he is neither a wicked person nor a righteous person], then one should judge the person favorably. One should not suspect another person [of doing wrong] for no reason [i.e. when he has insufficient evidence of such], as our Sages have explained, based on the verse: “You should judge the fellow members of your nation favorably.”
?
Q
3
uestions to Consider
▶▶ In what circumstances do you think it might be justified to judge someone unfavorably? ▶▶ Why doesn’t the Torah just say: “Don’t ever be judgmental at all”? Wouldn’t that be better?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
How We Form Judgements
In Brenner’s study (see “Setting the Stage,” above), participants were presented with a limited amount of information – they only heard the facts of the case, and the arguments of the two sides. But in our own lives – especially in the modern era of the Internet – people have access to a unlimited amount of information about other people, found on blogs, websites, facebook, twitter, etc. How do we sort through all of this information without becoming overwhelmed? The answer is that we humans rely on “heuristics” - shortcuts or rules of thumb - when making decisions. These mental shortcuts are necessary because they lessen the cognitive load pressing on our minds, and help us organize all of the information that we are constantly taking in from our environment. Our natural resistance to becoming overwhelmed with information is one of the reasons why we humans love to hear or read narratives; they summarize the important information about the lives of the characters in a form that is familiar and easy to digest. It’s much easier to understand events in the world as instances of good versus evil, or any one of the seven story types that generally appear.
Daniel Kahneman [We] build the best possible story from the information available… and if it is a good story, [we] believe it. The implication here is that when it comes to believing a story, it’s how good the story sounds, not necessarily its accuracy, that’s important. But narratives have an aspect of irrationality or untruth, because they sacrifice the whole story for one side of a story that fits neatly into a little box and conforms to one’s own worldview. Relying on these simple understandings of narratives often leads to inaccuracies and stereotypes. This is what the participants in Brenner’s study have demonstrated: people who take in narratives are often blinded to the whole story. Rarely do we ask: “What more would I need to know before I can have a more informed and complete opinion?” The last several years have seen many popular psychology books that touch on this line of research. There’s Ori and Rom Brafman’s Sway, Dan Ariely’s Predictably Irrational and, Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow. If you could sum up the popular literature on cognitive biases and our so-called irrationalities it would go something like this: We only require a small amount of information, often times a single factoid, to confidently form conclusions and generate new narratives to take on new, seemingly objective, but almost entirely subjective and inaccurate, worldviews.
?
Q
4
▶▶ Do you think that you sometimes form conclusions based on insufficient evidence? When has this ever happened to you?
uestions to Consider
▶▶ Does knowing that your information is limited help you judge others more favorably? ▶▶ What other techniques could you use to help yourself judge others favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
Judging Yourself אגרות וכתבים ס׳ צו:פחד יצחק
... יודע כי ישנם זמנים הפסולים לישיבת הדיינים,כל מי שלמד הלכות דיינים בחו״מ הערה זו מלמדת אותנו,אבל ישנה בכאן הערה שאינה מפורסמת כ״כ כי יחוד הזמן הכשר לדון בו איננו נוהג דוקא בדיין הבא לדון את חברו אלא שגם אדם היושב על כסא המשפט לדון את עצמו גם הוא מחוייב עומד בנסיונותיך מתוך חדוה פנימית...להתאים את שעת המשפט לזמן הכשר זה .ע״ש...מבלי חטוט בקביעות צורות חייך ואני מבטיח לך כי עלה תעלה וגם יוכל תוכל
Pachad Yitzchak, by Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner (1906-1980) Anyone who has learned carefully the Jewish laws of court and judgment will know that there are times when it is prohibited for a Jewish court to hear a case (e.g. during the nighttime). There is buried within this law an insight that is not so well known, namely, that the permissible and prohibited times to judge do not just refer to a judge who is judging someone else, but also can be understood to refer to someone who is judging oneself. Such a person is also obligated to consider when is the proper time to judge…
?
Q
5
uestions to Consider
▶▶ In what situations might people need to judge themselves? What does that even mean? ▶▶ When do you think would be a time when people should refrain from judging themselves? ▶▶ What steps can we take to judge ourselves more favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
Setting the Stage
The Irrationality of Irrationality The Paradox of Popular Psychology
By Sam McNerney, April 29, 2012
I
the store argued that the conversation that took n 1996, Lyle Brenner, Derek Koehler and place in the store was disruptive. Another group of Amos Tversky conducted a studyinvolving participants – essentially a mock jury – heard both students from San Jose State University and sides. Stanford University. The researchers were interested The key part of the experiment was that the in how people jump to conclusions based on participants were fully aware of the setup; they knew limited information. Previous work by Tversky, that they were only hearing one side or the entire Daniel Kahneman and other psychologists found story. But this didn’t stop the subjects who heard that people are “radically insensitive to both the one-sided evidence from being more confident quantity and quality of information that gives rise to and biased with their judgments than those who impressions and intuitions,” saw both sides. That is, so the researchers knew, of even when people had all course, that we humans don’t ven when people the underlying facts, they do a particularly good job of jumped to conclusions after had all the underlying weighing the pros and cons. hearing only one side of the But to what degree? Just how facts, they jumped to story. bad are we at assessing all the conclusions after hearing facts? The good news is that only one side of the story. Brenner, Koehler and To find out, Brenner and his Tversky found that simply team exposed the students prompting participants to consider the other side’s to legal scenarios. In one, a plaintiff named Mr. story reduced their bias – instructions to consider Thompson visits a drug store for a routine union the missing information was a manipulation in a visit. The store manager informs him that according later study – but it certainly did not eliminate it. to the union contract with the drug store, plaintiffs Their study shows us that people are not only willing cannot speak with the union employees on the to jump to conclusions after hearing only one side’s floor. After a brief deliberation, the manager calls story, but that even when they have additional the police and Mr. Thompson is handcuffed for information at their disposal that would suggest a trespassing. Later the charges were dropped, but Mr. different conclusion, they are still surprisingly likely Thompson is suing the store for false arrest. to do so. The scientists conclude on a somewhat All participants got this background information. pessimistic note: “People do not compensate Then, they heard from one of the two sides’ lawyers; sufficiently for missing information even when it is the lawyer for the union organizer framed the arrest painfully obvious that the information available to as an attempt to intimidate, while the lawyer for them is incomplete.”
“
?
Q
2
uestions to Consider
E
▶▶ Do you feel your judgments on others are objective or biased? ▶▶ Have you ever been in a situation where you judged someone incorrectly? If so, what was it? ▶▶ What steps could we take to judge others more favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
Judging Others ו:פרקי אבות א
. והוי דן את כל האדם לכף זכות, וקנה לך חבר, עשה לך רב:יהושע בן פרחיה אומר
Ethics of Our Fathers, 1:6 Yehoshua Ben Prachia said: Establish for yourself a teacher, acquire for yourself a friend, and judge every individual in a positive light.
פירוש רבינו עובדיה מברטנורא ואין האיש מוחזק לא לכאן, ואפשר לדונו לכף זכות או לכף חובה,כשהדבר שקול , ולא לחשוד אותו חנם שעושה מעשה שלא כהוגן. יש לדונו לכף זכות- ולא לכאן . הוי דן את חבירך לכף זכות- ״בצדק תשפוט עמיתך״:(.שכן דרשו חז״ל )שבועות ל
Commentary of the Bartenura When a situation can be viewed from either perspective, and it is possible to judge either in a positive light or in a negative light, and the person in question does not have a reputation in either direction [i.e. he is neither a wicked person nor a righteous person], then one should judge the person favorably. One should not suspect another person [of doing wrong] for no reason [i.e. when he has insufficient evidence of such], as our Sages have explained, based on the verse: “You should judge the fellow members of your nation favorably.”
?
Q
3
uestions to Consider
▶▶ In what circumstances do you think it might be justified to judge someone unfavorably? ▶▶ Why doesn’t the Torah just say: “Don’t ever be judgmental at all”? Wouldn’t that be better?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
How We Form Judgements
In Brenner’s study (see “Setting the Stage,” above), participants were presented with a limited amount of information – they only heard the facts of the case, and the arguments of the two sides. But in our own lives – especially in the modern era of the Internet – people have access to a unlimited amount of information about other people, found on blogs, websites, facebook, twitter, etc. How do we sort through all of this information without becoming overwhelmed? The answer is that we humans rely on “heuristics” - shortcuts or rules of thumb - when making decisions. These mental shortcuts are necessary because they lessen the cognitive load pressing on our minds, and help us organize all of the information that we are constantly taking in from our environment. Our natural resistance to becoming overwhelmed with information is one of the reasons why we humans love to hear or read narratives; they summarize the important information about the lives of the characters in a form that is familiar and easy to digest. It’s much easier to understand events in the world as instances of good versus evil, or any one of the seven story types that generally appear.
Daniel Kahneman [We] build the best possible story from the information available… and if it is a good story, [we] believe it. The implication here is that when it comes to believing a story, it’s how good the story sounds, not necessarily its accuracy, that’s important. But narratives have an aspect of irrationality or untruth, because they sacrifice the whole story for one side of a story that fits neatly into a little box and conforms to one’s own worldview. Relying on these simple understandings of narratives often leads to inaccuracies and stereotypes. This is what the participants in Brenner’s study have demonstrated: people who take in narratives are often blinded to the whole story. Rarely do we ask: “What more would I need to know before I can have a more informed and complete opinion?” The last several years have seen many popular psychology books that touch on this line of research. There’s Ori and Rom Brafman’s Sway, Dan Ariely’s Predictably Irrational and, Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow. If you could sum up the popular literature on cognitive biases and our so-called irrationalities it would go something like this: We only require a small amount of information, often times a single factoid, to confidently form conclusions and generate new narratives to take on new, seemingly objective, but almost entirely subjective and inaccurate, worldviews.
?
Q
4
▶▶ Do you think that you sometimes form conclusions based on insufficient evidence? When has this ever happened to you?
uestions to Consider
▶▶ Does knowing that your information is limited help you judge others more favorably? ▶▶ What other techniques could you use to help yourself judge others favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
ENGAGING THE TEXT
Judging Yourself אגרות וכתבים ס׳ צו:פחד יצחק
... יודע כי ישנם זמנים הפסולים לישיבת הדיינים,כל מי שלמד הלכות דיינים בחו״מ הערה זו מלמדת אותנו,אבל ישנה בכאן הערה שאינה מפורסמת כ״כ כי יחוד הזמן הכשר לדון בו איננו נוהג דוקא בדיין הבא לדון את חברו אלא שגם אדם היושב על כסא המשפט לדון את עצמו גם הוא מחוייב עומד בנסיונותיך מתוך חדוה פנימית...להתאים את שעת המשפט לזמן הכשר זה .ע״ש...מבלי חטוט בקביעות צורות חייך ואני מבטיח לך כי עלה תעלה וגם יוכל תוכל
Pachad Yitzchak, by Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner (1906-1980) Anyone who has learned carefully the Jewish laws of court and judgment will know that there are times when it is prohibited for a Jewish court to hear a case (e.g. during the nighttime). There is buried within this law an insight that is not so well known, namely, that the permissible and prohibited times to judge do not just refer to a judge who is judging someone else, but also can be understood to refer to someone who is judging oneself. Such a person is also obligated to consider when is the proper time to judge…
?
Q
5
uestions to Consider
▶▶ In what situations might people need to judge themselves? What does that even mean? ▶▶ When do you think would be a time when people should refrain from judging themselves? ▶▶ What steps can we take to judge ourselves more favorably?
“You’re So Judgmental!” - Judging Others, Judging Ourselves
