THINKER'S ALMANAC: November 23

How can an Ivy League football game played in 1951 help us to see the world more clearly?

Subject: Motivated Perception and Reasoning - Ivy League Football

Event:  Dartmouth and Princeton Football Game, 1951

We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. -Anaïs Nin

On this day in 1951, two Ivy League teams, Princeton and Dartmouth, played a football game in Princeton, New Jersey.  The game was roughly played; Princeton’s star tailback left the game in the second quarter with a broken nose, and at the end of the third quarter, a Dartmouth player broke his leg.  Princeton prevailed.

If not for two psychologists, one from Princeton -- Hadley Cantril, and another from Dartmouth -- Albert Hastorf, the game might have been just another forgotten football game.  What made it memorable, however, was a follow-up study published by the two psychologists. 

 Image by Keith Johnston from Pixabay

About one week after the game, Hastorf and Cantril asked students from both schools to give their assessment of the game.  Their responses depended on their school:  Princeton students overwhelmingly blamed Dartmouth for the rough play while Dartmouth students blamed Princeton.

Hastorf and Cantril then had all students watch a film of the game and keep track of infractions by players on both teams as if they were a referee.  The results showed both groups of students were unable to see the game dispassionately or objectively; the Princeton students still blamed Dartmouth and the Dartmouth students still blamed Princeton.  Although both groups of students watched the same film, both groups seemed to be watching an entirely different game.  

Hastof and Cantril published their case study entitled “They Saw a Game” in 1954.  It established the concept of motivated perception; in short, we don’t always see reality; instead, we see what we want to see.  This concept is similar to motivated reasoning, where instead of coming to conclusions based on evidence, we interpret the evidence in a way that it fits our preconceived beliefs.  In other words, we don’t always believe the truth; instead, we believe what we want to believe (1).

In her 2021 book The Scout Mindset, Julia Galef warns against the dangers of self deception and of motivated reasoning. Like the college students in 1951, we sometimes employ emotionally-biased reasoning to produce the verdict we want to be true in favor of the actual truth. We cherry-pick evidence that supports our side, and we rationalize to make a case sound better than it actually is.  Galef calls motivated reasoning the soldier mindset and argues that it is an unconscious cognitive bias that needs to be exposed and rooted out.  Galef also prescribes a more sound, reasonable approach called the scout mindset.  Instead of seeing what we want to see or being defensive, we need to seek first to understand.  We should be skeptical of our own conclusions and value the pursuit of truth over our fears of being right or wrong.  The pursuit of the scout mindset means testing your own claims and understanding that changing your mind is not a sign of weakness (2).

One powerful way to understand motivated reasoning is to see it through the eyes of a sports fan.  Imagine you are watching a basketball game, a game where your favorite team is competing for a championship against a longtime rival.  Imagine your reaction when your team is charged with a foul that results in points being taken off the scoreboard.  What would be your honest reaction?  Would your emotions motivate you to find immediate fault with the referee's call and begin to construct rationalizations for why the call was wrong?  Or would you calmly accept the call and defer to the referee’s indifferent judgment?  Most honest fans -- short for “fanatics” -- will admit that their emotional 

investment in their team prejudices them and blinds them to objective judgment.  In addition, they are rarely even consciously aware of their own bias. To further understand the impact of motivated reasoning, compare the reaction you have when your team is called for a foul versus when your team’s opponent is called for a foul?  In the latter case, do you spend any time or emotional energy scrutinizing the fairness or justice of such a decision?

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason: How did the Dartmouth fans see the game differently from the Princeton fans, and how does this help explain motivated perception?

Challenge -  Scouts and Soldiers:  Write a public service announcement that explains the thinking behind the scout mindset versus the soldier mindset.  Try to persuade your audience that the scout mindset is preferable and a possible solution to the political polarization that is plaguing our country.

Sources:

1-Resnick, Brian. “How desire can warp our view of the world.” Vox.com 8 Aug. 2019.

2-Galef, Julia.  The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t.  New York:  Portfolio/Penguin, 2021.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - November 23

How can an Ivy League football game played in 1951 help us to see the world more clearly?

Subject: Motivated Perception and Reasoning - Ivy League Football

Event:  Dartmouth and Princeton Football Game, 1951

We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. -Anaïs Nin

On this day in 1951, two Ivy League teams, Princeton and Dartmouth, played a football game in Princeton, New Jersey.  The game was roughly played; Princeton’s star tailback left the game in the second quarter with a broken nose, and at the end of the third quarter, a Dartmouth player broke his leg.  Princeton prevailed.

                                                                Image by David Mark from Pixabay 

If not for two psychologists, one from Princeton -- Hadley Cantril, and another from Dartmouth -- Albert Hastorf, the game might have been just another forgotten football game.  What made it memorable, however, was a follow-up study published by the two psychologists.  

About one week after the game, Hastorf and Cantril asked students from both schools to give their assessment of the game.  Their responses depended on their school:  Princeton students overwhelmingly blamed Dartmouth for the rough play while Dartmouth students blamed Princeton.

Hastorf and Cantril then had all students watch a film of the game and keep track of infractions by players on both teams as if they were a referee.  The results showed both groups of students were unable to see the game dispassionately or objectively; the Princeton students still blamed Dartmouth and the Dartmouth students still blamed Princeton.  Although both groups of students watched the same film, both groups seemed to be watching an entirely different game.  

Hastorf and Cantril published their case study entitled “They Saw a Game” in 1954.  It established the concept of motivated perception; in short, we don’t always see reality; instead, we see what we want to see.  This concept is similar to motivated reasoning, where instead of coming to conclusions based on evidence, we interpret the evidence in a way that fits our preconceived beliefs.  In other words, we don’t always believe the truth; instead, we believe what we want to believe (1).

In her 2021 book The Scout Mindset, Julia Galef warns against the dangers of self-deception and of motivated reasoning. Like the college students in 1951, we sometimes employ emotionally-biased reasoning to produce the verdict we want to be true in favor of the actual truth. We cherry-pick evidence that supports our side, and we rationalize to make a case sound better than it actually is.  Galef calls motivated reasoning the soldier mindset and argues that it is an unconscious cognitive bias that needs to be exposed and rooted out.  Galef also prescribes a more sound, reasonable approach called the scout mindset.  Instead of seeing what we want to see or being defensive, we need to seek first to understand.  We should be skeptical of our own conclusions and value the pursuit of truth over our fears of being right or wrong.  The pursuit of the scout mindset means testing your own claims and understanding that changing your mind is not a sign of weakness (2).

One powerful way to understand motivated reasoning is to see it through the eyes of a sports fan.  Imagine you are watching a basketball game, a game where your favorite team is competing for a championship against a longtime rival.  Imagine your reaction when your team is charged with a foul that results in points being taken off the scoreboard.  What would be your honest reaction?  Would your emotions motivate you to find immediate fault with the referee's call and begin to construct rationalizations for why the call was wrong?  Or would you calmly accept the call and defer to the referee’s indifferent judgment?  Most honest fans -- short for “fanatics” -- will admit that their emotional 

investment in their team prejudices them and blinds them to objective judgment.  In addition, they are rarely even consciously aware of their own bias. To further understand the impact of motivated reasoning, compare the reaction you have when your team is called for a foul versus when your team’s opponent is called for a foul?  In the latter case, do you spend any time or emotional energy scrutinizing the fairness or justice of such a decision?

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason: What is the difference between the soldier mindset and the scout mindset, and which mindset was more prominent in the 1951 football study?

Challenge -  Scouts and Soldiers:  Write a public service announcement that explains the thinking behind the scout mindset versus the soldier mindset.  Try to persuade your audience that the scout mindset is preferable and a possible solution to the political polarization that is plaguing our country.

Sources:

1-Resnick, Brian. “How desire can warp our view of the world.” Vox.com 8 Aug. 2019.

2-Galef, Julia.  The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t.  New York:  Portfolio/Penguin, 2021.

THINKER'S ALMANAC: January 13

How can the military metaphors of a soldier and a scout help us reason better?

Subject:  Motivated Reasoning - The Dreyfus Affair

Event:  Publication of Emile Zola’s open letter, J’Accuse, 1898

On January 13, 1898, a front-page letter was published in a Paris newspaper by the French writer Emile Zola.  Zola’s letter was addressed to the president of the French Republic and was written in defense of Alfred Dreyfus.  In his 4,000-word letter, Zola accused the French government and military of a cover-up and of falsely convicting an innocent man of treason (1).

The events discussed in Zola’s letter began four years earlier.  In 1894, a torn-up document was found in a wastepaper basket that caused the French military to suspect that someone in their ranks was passing military secrets to the Germans. After a brief investigation, French officials found no solid evidence to convict anyone; however, one man, Alfred Dreyfus, the only Jewish officer on the General Staff, was accused on highly circumstantial evidence.  In a time of heightened anti-semitism, Dreyfus’ Jewish heritage made him an easy scapegoat. Even though Dreyfus had a sterling record and did not fit the profile of a spy, a case was built to incriminate him.  Despite the fact that experts 

disagreed, army authorities declared that Dreyfus’ handwriting matched the writing on the memo. When a search of Dreyfus’ residence yielded no evidence of espionage, they concluded that he was crafty enough to hide anything incriminating.  Also, the fact that Dreyfus studied foreign languages was interpreted as evidence of his desire to conspire with the enemy.

Not only was Dreyfus found guilty of treason, he was also court-martialed.  In a humiliating public ceremony, his sword was broken in two and his military 

insignia were ripped from his uniform.  Next, he was shipped off to Devil’s Island, a penal colony off the coast of South America.

Zola’s letter brought public scrutiny to the Dreyfus Affair.  It revealed that the French authorities knew the identity of the actual culprit and that they were covering up evidence to save face.  Zola’s accusations were not without consequence for him; he was convicted of libel and sentenced to one year in prison.  However, his courage resulted in eventual justice for Dreyfus, who was 

eventually pardoned by the President of France. Dreyfus also went on to serve with distinction in World War I (2).

In a 2016 TED Talk entitled Why You Think You’re Right -- Even When You’re Wrong, Julia Galef presented the Dreyfus Affair as a case study in the dangers of motivated reasoning. Like the French military in the Dreyfus Affair, we sometimes employ emotionally-biased reasoning to produce the verdict we want to be true in favor of the actual truth. We cherry-pick evidence that supports our side, and we rationalize to make a case sound better than it actually is.  Galef calls motivated reasoning the soldier mindset and argues that it is an unconscious cognitive bias that needs to be exposed and rooted out.  Galef also prescribes a more sound, reasonable approach called the scout mindset.  Instead of seeing what we want to see or being defensive, we need to seek first to understand.  We should be skeptical of our own conclusions and value the pursuit of truth over our fears of being right or wrong.  The pursuit of the scout mindset means testing your own claims and understanding that changing your mind is not a sign of weakness (3).

                                                            Image by Sasin Tipchai from Pixabay 

One powerful way to understand motivated reasoning is to see it through the eyes of a sports fan.  Imagine you are watching a basketball game, a game where your favorite team is competing for a championship against a longtime rival.  Imagine your reaction when your team is charged with a foul that results in points being taken off the scoreboard.  What would be your honest reaction?  Would your emotions motivate you to find immediate fault with the referee's call and begin to construct rationalizations for why the call was wrong?  Or would you calmly accept the call and defer to the referee’s indifferent judgment?  Most honest fans -- short for “fanatics” -- will admit that their emotional 

investment in their team prejudices them and blinds them to objective judgment.  In addition, they are rarely even consciously aware of their own bias. To further understand the impact of motivated reasoning, compare the reaction you have when your team is called for a foul versus when your team’s opponent is called for a foul?  In the latter case, do you spend any time or emotional energy scrutinizing the fairness or justice of such a decision?

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  How did motivated reasoning result in the injustice of the Dreyfus Affair, and why is it so hard for the average person to practice the scout mindset?

Challenge - Open Letters:  Zola’s open letter is just one of many examples of this unique genre of communication.  What makes the open letter interesting as a form is its dual audience:  the addressee and the general public.  The content of an open letter is targeted at a specific individual or group, yet the letter is published in an “open” public forum.  One of the most famous open letters ever written, Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” was itself written in response to another open letter.  In his letter dated April 16, 1963, King was responding to a letter published in the Birmingham Post-Herald in which eight Alabama clergymen challenged his presence in Alabama and his strategy of nonviolent resistance to racism.  Research open letters, and find an example of one that you find interesting.  Explain the letter’s rhetorical situation:  who was the writer, what were the target audiences, when and why was it published?

Sources:  

1:  Zola, Emile. I Accuse 13 January 1898.

2. Harris, Robert. The Whistle-Blower Who Freed Dreyfus.  The New York Times 1 January 2014.

3. Galef, Julia. Why You Think You’re Right -- Even When You’re Wrong.  February 2016.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - April 4

What political leader demonstrated courage by speaking on April 4, and what literary character demonstrated courage by writing on April 4?

Subject:  Courage to Speak and Write - R.F.K.’s Speech and Winston Smith’s Diary

Event: Robert F. Kennedy speaks after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Winston Smith begins writing in his diary.

Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write. -John Adams

On this day we remember two individuals: one a historical figure who demonstrated courage by speaking, the other a fictional character who demonstrated courage by writing.

On this day in 1968, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who was running for the Democratic nomination for president, was preparing to give a campaign speech in Indianapolis, Indiana.  Just before he was scheduled to speak to the predominantly African-American audience, Kennedy learned that Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee.

Kennedy was warned by the police that the crown had not yet heard the bad news and that they might become unruly or violent once they heard of King’s death. Despite the danger, Kennedy decided not only to address the audience but also to inform them of the tragedy.  

Kennedy spoke for fewer than five minutes, but what he said will never be forgotten.  He began by immediately delivering the bad news. After pausing for a moment to allow the shocked crowd to gather its wits, Kennedy reminded the audience of King’s efforts to replace violence with understanding and compassion.  He showed empathy for his audience, comparing the anger they were feeling to the anger he felt when his brother was killed by an assassin five years earlier in Dallas. Instead of focusing on the racial divide in the United States, Kennedy instead made an appeal for unity and for justice:

What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.

Like Martin Luther King, Jr. did before him, Kennedy appealed to hope over despair and to peace over violence:

And let’s dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.

Kennedy did not have to speak on April 4, 1968, and no one would have faulted him for canceling his appearance under the sad circumstances.  Nevertheless, Kennedy seized the moment to courageously present what was much more than just a campaign speech. His brief words transformed a moment of sorrow into a time of rededication to the mission of Martin Luther King, Jr. and to what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.”

Two months later, on June 5, 1968, Kennedy himself was assassinated after winning the California presidential primary (1).

The second act of courage that took place on this day was in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

In the novel’s opening chapter, the protagonist Winston Smith commits a forbidden act of rebellion, an act that we all take for granted. In the world of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, the simple act that Winston performs could lead to punishment by death or a sentence of twenty-five years of forced labor:

The thing that he was about to do was to open a diary. . . . He dipped the pen into the ink and then faltered for just a second. A tremor had gone through his bowels. To mark the paper was the decisive act. In small clumsy letters he wrote:

April 4th, 1984.

He sat back. A sense of complete helplessness had descended upon him.. . .

Suddenly he began writing in sheer panic, only imperfectly aware of what he was setting down. His small but childish handwriting straggled up and down the page, shedding first its capital letters and finally even its full stops:

April 4th, 1984. Last night to the flicks. All war films. . . .

In the dystopian world of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, the one-party government of Oceania is in a perpetual state of war and is led by the all-seeing but unseen leader called Big Brother.  By putting his pen to paper, Winston Smith, a party worker, is committing the radical and unlawful act of expressing his own individual thoughts and questioning his government.

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What did Robert Kennedy and Winston Smith do that showed courage?

Challenge - Courageous Call for Communication: What are the reasons we should not take our ability to read, think, speak, and write for granted?  In the years leading up to the American Revolution, John Adams wrote an essay called “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Federal Law” (1765).  In this essay, Adams laid the legal groundwork for the Revolution, challenging his readers to remember the important role that literacy plays as the foundation of human freedoms:

Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge.  Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.

Write a Public Service Announcement (PSA) that challenges your audience to reconsider and reimagine the importance of literacy — of speaking, writing, thinking, and writing.  Motivate your audience to rededicate themselves to these skills that we so often take for granted. 

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

-April 4, 1874:  On this day entomologist Samuel H. Scudder published the story “Look at Your Fish”  in Every Saturday magazine.  In the story, Scudder recounts his early education as a scientist under the tutelage of renowned zoologist Jean Agassiz (1807-1873), whose first lesson was to have his student scrupulously study a grunt fish.

-April 4, 2016:  Julia Galef presented a TED Talk entitled “Why You Think You’re Right Even When You’re Wrong” on this day.  Her talk focused on the Dreyfus Affair (See THINKER’S ALMANAC - January 13) and especially on the heroic efforts of Colonel Georges Picquart who searched for the truth when others wouldn’t.  Galef warns against the “soldier mindset,” which employs “motivated reasoning” to see what it wants to see rather than to objectively seek out the truth.  Her prescription is to take on the “Scout Mindset,”  which sets aside personal bias and prejudice to objectively seek the kinds of facts and evidence that will lead to the truth.

Sources:

1-Kennedy, Robert F.  STATEMENT ON ASSASSINATION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, APRIL 4, 1968.  John F. Kennedy Library.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - April 4

What political leader demonstrated courage by speaking on April 4, and what literary character demonstrated courage by writing on April 4?

Subject:  Courage to Speak and Write - R.F.K.’s Speech and Winston Smith’s Diary

Event: Robert F. Kennedy speaks after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Winston Smith begins writing in his diary.

Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write. -John Adams

On this day we remember two individuals: one a historical figure who demonstrated courage by speaking, the other a fictional character who demonstrated courage by writing.

On this day in 1968, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who was running for the Democratic nomination for president, was preparing to give a campaign speech in Indianapolis, Indiana.  Just before he was scheduled to speak to the predominantly African-American audience, Kennedy learned that Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee.

Kennedy was warned by the police that the crown had not yet heard the bad news and that they might become unruly or violent once they heard of King’s death. Despite the danger, Kennedy decided not only to address the audience but also to inform them of the tragedy.  

Kennedy spoke for fewer than five minutes, but what he said will never be forgotten.  He began by immediately delivering the bad news. After pausing for a moment to allow the shocked crowd to gather its wits, Kennedy reminded the audience of King’s efforts to replace violence with understanding and compassion.  He showed empathy for his audience, comparing the anger they were feeling to the anger he felt when his brother was killed by an assassin five years earlier in Dallas. Instead of focusing on the racial divide in the United States, Kennedy instead made an appeal for unity and for justice:

What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.

Like Martin Luther King, Jr. did before him, Kennedy appealed to hope over despair and to peace over violence:

And let’s dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.

                                                                Image by Greg Reese from Pixabay 

Kennedy did not have to speak on April 4, 1968, and no one would have faulted him for canceling his appearance under the sad circumstances.  Nevertheless, Kennedy seized the moment to courageously present what was much more than just a campaign speech. His brief words transformed a moment of sorrow into a time of rededication to the mission of Martin Luther King, Jr. and to what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.”

Two months later, on June 5, 1968, Kennedy himself was assassinated after winning the California presidential primary (1).

The second act of courage that took place on this day was in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

In the novel’s opening chapter, the protagonist Winston Smith commits a forbidden act of rebellion, an act that we all take for granted. In the world of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, the simple act that Winston performs could lead to punishment by death or a sentence of twenty-five years of forced labor:

The thing that he was about to do was to open a diary. . . . He dipped the pen into the ink and then faltered for just a second. A tremor had gone through his bowels. To mark the paper was the decisive act. In small clumsy letters he wrote:

April 4th, 1984.

He sat back. A sense of complete helplessness had descended upon him.. . .

Suddenly he began writing in sheer panic, only imperfectly aware of what he was setting down. His small but childish handwriting straggled up and down the page, shedding first its capital letters and finally even its full stops:

April 4th, 1984. Last night to the flicks. All war films. . . .

In the dystopian world of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, the one-party government of Oceania is in a perpetual state of war and is led by the all-seeing but unseen leader called Big Brother.  By putting his pen to paper, Winston Smith, a party worker, is committing the radical and unlawful act of expressing his own individual thoughts and questioning his government.

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason: How did Robert F. Kennedy respond to the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.? In George Orwell’s novel 1984, what courageous act does Winston Smith perform?

Challenge - Courageous Call for Communication: What are the reasons we should not take our ability to read, think, speak, and write for granted?  In the years leading up to the American Revolution, John Adams wrote an essay called “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Federal Law” (1765).  In this essay, Adams laid the legal groundwork for the Revolution, challenging his readers to remember the important role that literacy plays as the foundation of human freedoms:

Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge.  Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.

Write a Public Service Announcement (PSA) that challenges your audience to reconsider and reimagine the importance of literacy — of speaking, writing, thinking, and writing.  Motivate your audience to rededicate themselves to these skills that we so often take for granted. 

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

-April 4, 1874:  On this day entomologist Samuel H. Scudder published the story “Look at Your Fish”  in Every Saturday magazine.  In the story, Scudder recounts his early education as a scientist under the tutelage of renowned zoologist Jean Agassiz (1807-1873), whose first lesson was to have his student scrupulously study a grunt fish. 

-Samuel H. Scudder, "In the Laboratory With Agassiz", Every Saturday, (April 4, 1974) 16, 369-370.

-April 4, 2016:  Julia Galef presented a TED Talk entitled “Why You Think You’re Right Even When You’re Wrong” on this day.  Her talk focused on the Dreyfus Affair (See THINKER’S ALMANAC - January 13) and especially on the heroic efforts of Colonel Georges Picquart who searched for the truth when others wouldn’t.  Galef warns against the “soldier mindset,” which employs “motivated reasoning” to see what it wants to see rather than to objectively seek out the truth.  Her prescription is to take on the “Scout Mindset,”  which sets aside personal bias and prejudice to objectively seek the kinds of facts and evidence that will lead to the truth.

Sources:

1-Kennedy, Robert F.  STATEMENT ON ASSASSINATION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, APRIL 4, 1968.  John F. Kennedy Library.