Depending on just how much one identifies with a person whose behavior they seek to explain, he/she is likely to adopt radically different descriptions of the behavior in question. The folk-conceptual theory approaches this same phenomenon by suggesting that people apply a range of different folk models to explain their own behavior and those around them. Not to worry, a replacement theory is available, and it seems to illustrate the same point, albeit with a little less flair. Recent studies have shown that this basic contrast between situational versus dispositional explanations doesn’t quite explain the full range of data on this topic. Okay, so that’s classical attribution theory, at least if you add a little salt to the vocabulary. The reason your friend didn’t pay you the money he owes you? Well, he’s just a lazy bastard! What does this mean? Well, it means the reason you didn’t pay your bill on time this month is because of those unexpected medical expenses, the repair bill for the car, and well, it was little Johnny’s birthday, and you had to get him something… (You know the story). This tendency has generally been described as the Fundamental Attribution Error, or alternatively, as a function of Actor-Obeserver Asymmetry. In the classic formulation of the problem, humans seem to possess a nearly universal tendency to explain other people’s actions (particularly those we don’t like) as a function of some consistent feature of their own personality while explaining our own actions in terms of situational factors. And no, I didn’t just choose that image, because I live in Alaska I actually thought about it and decided that it would be the best metaphor I could… well, anyway… the point is that this is part of a larger problem. This is just the tip of the iceberg, a larger problem looms beneath the surface. My point is of course that trivializing generalizations are a stick in the side of lots of folks, not just atheists. …some might even add a “Praise Jesus!” or something like that, but my mind’s ear just doesn’t really want to go there. “Damned right,” I can just hear them saying about that red line. Still, I wonder, would this look any different from any other religious perspective? If I asked for ‘Reasons I believe in God’, used the exact same sentence for the red color, and then made just a few strategic changes to the decoy list (Peer Pressure, Social Conformity, Afraid of Death, Raised That Way, Mental Disturbance, Haven’t Really Thought About It), I imagine we could present this to a few believers and generate exactly the same sense of vindication that I feel looking at this meme right now. …as opposed to some dismissive third person narrative. So, it’s nice to see a bold affirmation that one’s own judgement really is the basis of, …well, ones own judgement! You know how it goes “The only reason you don’t believe is blah blah, blah…” …Blech! Seriously I’ve heard that line way too many times (and apparently so did someone else). It’s damned frustrating to deal with that kind of commentary. You see, I look at this meme, and a part of me wants to shout “Yeah Boyeeee!” (…preferably in the face of some believer who has just suggested one of the alternatives). And by ‘kind of” I mean ‘really’ …kind of. As far as Memes go, I actually kind of like this one. I found this piece on Stumbleupon, I believe.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |