In a recent post I commented on the following quote. It's from an announcement post by the Discovery Institute (DI) about a new group joining their Intelligent Design Network in Colorado:
"In other words, the fact that the world appears to be designed is a testament to the truth that it is, in fact, designed." (The Announcement)
I wanted to expand on it a bit. One of my peeves about the quote is the idea that if something 'appears', then it must be as it appears. I listed a few examples in my previous post (And There is Still Nothing Religious about Intelligent Design) where that isn't the case. You cannot reliably assume that the appearance of anything is the fact of that same thing.
This quote is a paraphrase from the guest speaker,Doug Axe, for this new group's first meeting. I've spoken about Doug before, about his book "Undeniable" (Design Intuition . . . is that really a Thing?), which certainly doesn't live up to its title. All it takes is one example of someone's intuition not being accurate, that makes intuition easily deniable! The tack Dougie is on is trying to sell people on the idea that their intuition is as valid and useful a way of making determinations about any subject as anything else, such as scientific investigation. Here is a quote that states what they want to sell pretty clearly:
This quote is a paraphrase from the guest speaker,Doug Axe, for this new group's first meeting. I've spoken about Doug before, about his book "Undeniable" (Design Intuition . . . is that really a Thing?), which certainly doesn't live up to its title. All it takes is one example of someone's intuition not being accurate, that makes intuition easily deniable! The tack Dougie is on is trying to sell people on the idea that their intuition is as valid and useful a way of making determinations about any subject as anything else, such as scientific investigation. Here is a quote that states what they want to sell pretty clearly:
"We don't need to rely slavishly on what scientists say because, in an important sense, we are all scientists, capable of judging a big scientific idea like evolution, if not necessarily the technical details, for ourselves." (More Scientists Praise Douglas Axe's Undeniable)Harvard Business School has an interesting way of raising some issues about 'Intuition'. At this site: (Test Yourself: Are You Being Tricked by Intuition?). The article briefly discusses that people generally use two 'systems' for processing information, they call them System 1 and System 2 . . . I know, silly names, but the point is that System 1 is an intuitive approach, System 2 is when you think about it before making a judgement. In general System 1 is used when we either don't have time to think things through, or are unwilling -- for whatever reason -- to think things through. They make this comment:
"Of course, it's easier to simply rely on our intuitions than to bother to check them, but performing that check can improve the quality of our judgments and choices."
So what the DI is really asking you to do is to not think things through. It's as simple as that. They do not want you to think, they want you to rely on your intuition about a subject, intuition that can easily be led astray by appearances.
Don't tell me, but think about it, can you think of a situation where your intuition about something or someone let you down? If you want, go ahead and comment here about it. I'll tell you one:
Our intuition rarely helps us make good decisions! Yes, it does sometimes, but not as often as you might think. I know someone reading this will probably come up with more than one occasion when their intuition was dead on, but I want to raise two points about that.
First of all, how did you know your intuition was right? It was after you used System 1 and started thinking about things (System 2), wasn't it? You had to think about things, gain some experience with whatever, or whomever, you intuited about and come to a conclusion based on more than just your intuition, didn't you? You had to go further to reach a point of deciding your intuition was correct, but do you always get that chance or even take that opportunity? So in the end, it's not that your intuition was correct, but you had to rely on something other than your intuition, didn't you? You might remember the times when your first instinct about something was correct, but do you really remember all the times when it was not? Be honest, at least with yourself! I know when my intuition fails, I don't blame my intuition, I simply move on and rarely consider it.
My second point is buried in my story about 'Mary'. If I hadn't gotten to know her, I would have left that job believing that my intuition was correct, if I gave her any thought at all. I would have no idea how wrong I was because we would have never interacted. How often do you really get your intuition confirmed or denied? That's something you have to consider. Often we never go past our intuitive judgment for any number of reasons, possible time or simply circumstances don't allow it. You assume your intuition was correct, not because it is correct, but because you have this inflated view of your intuition because it may never had gotten tested.
Have you ever been disappointed in a meal at a restaurant? Especially trying a dish or a new restaurant for the first time? You go to a new place because of your intuition. Maybe you heard some good things, read a good review, or someone you know said something about it. You have no first-hand knowledge so you go there based on what, a hunch? Usually it works out OK, not often spectacular, but OK. Sometimes you are severely disappointed. You go from your belief to actual knowledge and come to a final decision. There are a number of places I will never set foot in again! I'm sure you know a few yourself! In those rare cases when the results are spectacular, you pat yourself on the back for 'knowing' it was going to be good -- but reaching that conclusion wasn't intuitive, but based on actual experience. It could have just as easily gone to other way. Intuition is a crap-shoot.
One last story of how my intuition nearly cost me a terrific job opportunity:
Intuition is fine when you have to make a snap judgment occasionally, but as a regular part of your decision making, I would encourage you to think more often. I would also encourage you to consider careful any calls that want you to stop thinking! When they want you to disengage the brain is when you should rev it up into high gear and think even harder! Odds are someone is trying to hide something from you. In the DI's case, the sheer vacuous nature of their arguments.
I want to toss one more thought. The DI uses one tactic where they claim to not want to push Intelligent Design, but to engage students with 'critical thinking' to show the weaknesses in Evolutionary Theory. I believe this whole intuition argument shows you how that critical thinking tactic has failed, because when you think critically about ID, you find there is nothing there! So now they switch gears and don't want you to think at all. Interesting, isn't it?
Don't tell me, but think about it, can you think of a situation where your intuition about something or someone let you down? If you want, go ahead and comment here about it. I'll tell you one:
One of my favorite people is a lady who I will call 'Mary'. I didn't work with Mary, but would pass her office two or three times a day. She looked to be considerably younger than myself, dark hair with a streak of dark red in it, and dressed most often in black and other dark colors. My intuition said 'goth', or as near as you can get in this particular workplace. Now this wasn't a negative thing, I just never bothered taking the time to do more than pass by.
That changed one day when she sneezed. I know, pretty silly, but you should have seen it. I was carrying a cup of ice and a soda coming up on a corner. She was just about to come around the corner from the opposite direction when she sneezed. There was no warning, no inhalation, no sound telling me someone was there, just this sharp, and loud sneeze. She startled the hell out of me -- I didn't drop my drink, but it was close. The two of us laughed about it and talked for the first time.
What I discovered was a lady older than my estimation, with an incredible sense of humor, a hair trigger on her bullshit meter, and someone who shared a surprising number of the same interests as myself. I got into the habit of stopping by her cubicle at least once a day to talk for a few minutes, share some news, pass on a joke or pictures. She even got along with my granddaughter over a shared appreciation for a Gothic version of Barbie called 'Monster High'. OK, I didn't say we had everything in common, just a surprising amount.
My intuition failed me when I pigeon-holed her as someone with whom I would have little in common. What I ended up with is a friend! I don't work in that area any longer, so we don't see each other that often. But we do have lunch on occasion and email/text each other often.That's only one example. I'm sure you can think of many others for yourself, I know I can! Anyone reading this a gambler? I love to play poker and the number of times my intuition has let me down is why I do not make a living as a professional poker player! One of my uncles likes to play the ponies, in fact he took me on my first ever visit to Aqueduct in NY. His 'intuition' was also why he didn't make a living picking horses!
Our intuition rarely helps us make good decisions! Yes, it does sometimes, but not as often as you might think. I know someone reading this will probably come up with more than one occasion when their intuition was dead on, but I want to raise two points about that.
First of all, how did you know your intuition was right? It was after you used System 1 and started thinking about things (System 2), wasn't it? You had to think about things, gain some experience with whatever, or whomever, you intuited about and come to a conclusion based on more than just your intuition, didn't you? You had to go further to reach a point of deciding your intuition was correct, but do you always get that chance or even take that opportunity? So in the end, it's not that your intuition was correct, but you had to rely on something other than your intuition, didn't you? You might remember the times when your first instinct about something was correct, but do you really remember all the times when it was not? Be honest, at least with yourself! I know when my intuition fails, I don't blame my intuition, I simply move on and rarely consider it.
My second point is buried in my story about 'Mary'. If I hadn't gotten to know her, I would have left that job believing that my intuition was correct, if I gave her any thought at all. I would have no idea how wrong I was because we would have never interacted. How often do you really get your intuition confirmed or denied? That's something you have to consider. Often we never go past our intuitive judgment for any number of reasons, possible time or simply circumstances don't allow it. You assume your intuition was correct, not because it is correct, but because you have this inflated view of your intuition because it may never had gotten tested.
Have you ever been disappointed in a meal at a restaurant? Especially trying a dish or a new restaurant for the first time? You go to a new place because of your intuition. Maybe you heard some good things, read a good review, or someone you know said something about it. You have no first-hand knowledge so you go there based on what, a hunch? Usually it works out OK, not often spectacular, but OK. Sometimes you are severely disappointed. You go from your belief to actual knowledge and come to a final decision. There are a number of places I will never set foot in again! I'm sure you know a few yourself! In those rare cases when the results are spectacular, you pat yourself on the back for 'knowing' it was going to be good -- but reaching that conclusion wasn't intuitive, but based on actual experience. It could have just as easily gone to other way. Intuition is a crap-shoot.
One last story of how my intuition nearly cost me a terrific job opportunity:
I was working as a government contractor for a small company and the contract was re-competed and awarded to a different company. I had contact with several people from that company previously and I was less than impressed. It wasn't their technical skills, but their religious beliefs. Yes the three I had contact with were very narrow-minded evangelicals who made damn sure everyone around them knew it and kept trying to preach to everyone around them -- often whining about their religious freedom when the government supervisors would basically tell them to knock it off! I even wrote a little about one of them here. You can imagine how well that goes over with me!
Well, I very nearly didn't go to my interview because my impression of the company was colored by these three religious nut jobs and because I had already had a couple of other very promising interviews, so I wasn't worried about continuous employment. However, since I had already made the appointment, I went and it resulted in a pretty terrific job for a pretty terrific company -- I stayed there many years longer than any of the religious idiots! To give you an idea of how good the interview went, I even raised my concern over the three amigos to the owner of the company, and he handled that part of the discussion in a very professional manner! I was impressed. I would have missed out if I let my intuition guide me.There is my problem with this whole argument from the DI. They want you to stop thinking, to take everything at face value, because that's all they have. They have no real science, they have made no scientific advances, they have nothing but their religious beliefs and they certainly do not want anyone 'thinking' about those beliefs. They want you to make decisions based on your religious beliefs and fight anyone who wants and expects you to think!
Intuition is fine when you have to make a snap judgment occasionally, but as a regular part of your decision making, I would encourage you to think more often. I would also encourage you to consider careful any calls that want you to stop thinking! When they want you to disengage the brain is when you should rev it up into high gear and think even harder! Odds are someone is trying to hide something from you. In the DI's case, the sheer vacuous nature of their arguments.
I want to toss one more thought. The DI uses one tactic where they claim to not want to push Intelligent Design, but to engage students with 'critical thinking' to show the weaknesses in Evolutionary Theory. I believe this whole intuition argument shows you how that critical thinking tactic has failed, because when you think critically about ID, you find there is nothing there! So now they switch gears and don't want you to think at all. Interesting, isn't it?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment