First Post and an Explanation

OK, first post to this blog.  I have long been contemplating a place where, unlike Facebook, I can say what I want about religion and politics.  So perhaps I should explain why I DO NOT want to discuss those topics on Facebook.  Here it goes.

It's the intersection of several things:

1)  If you are a student of cognitive science, you already know that when it comes to emotional topics such as religion and politics, we mostly simply try to find evidence to support what we believe and to undermine those with whom we do not agree.  Furthermore, the more one argues with us, the more "convinced" we become of our position.  In short, little is accomplished by arguing about this stuff.  By the way, I say "we" and "our" because this is not a liberal/conservative thing, it's a human thing and the research shows this.

2)  People also suffer from the affect heuristic (mental shorcut).  Essentially, it says that if someone pleases you emotionally, it's easier simply to assume that they are "good" on every topic.  Conversely, if they upset you, it's easier to just assume that they are "bad" on every topic.  So, for example, if you say to someone "Hitler loved children and dogs" (he did),  it likely would create mental discomfort for them.  It's far easier (and takes less mental energy) to simply assume that Hitler was just evil all around.

This has an important implication for American politics.  It means that it is apparently not easy to disagree with George Bush or Barak Obama about what is the best public policy for America while simultaneously admitting that they are generally good people who care about America, love their children, are honest and intelligent, etc. Far easier to be seduced into the "they are completely EVIL and STUPID" viewpoint.  This actually takes *less* mental effort.  Our modern media (FOX, MSNBC, etc) cater to this mental laziness.

3) The more emotional and angry we are, the more we do not actually listen to what is being said but instead hear what we expect to hear.  Witness almost any conversation about race these days where the speaker and the listener are on opposite sides of the black/white divide.  Seriously, if you compared what is said to what is heard, it's kind of amazing (in a sad way).

4)  I have lots of FB friend who say all sorts of inflammatory and amazingly ignorant things.  I value those friendships too much to think anything will be accomplished by pointing out to them their ignorance or offensiveness.  They are not likely going to get why what they said is offensive or ignorant, but they will likely get angry. That is not disrespect: see points 1-3.

Well, given all of this, why even bother with this blog?  I will tell you why.  I simply refuse to give up hope.  One should not fail to speak out against stupidity just because one wants to be "nice".  I'll stay "nice" on Facebook.  That is my privilege and important to me.  Important because those that disagree with me need to realize that people like me are not evil incarnate (I know, like the devil I am trying to deceive you).  And I do think most of us share similar values - we want our kids to do well, we want hard workers to succeed, we want criminals to fail, we want fewer dysfunctional people with no hope, we want America to stay free, etc.  But we have serious disagreements about what all those things mean in the fine print and what are the best ways to effect the best outcomes via public policy.  That is OK.  We need dialogue around these things, not finger pointing and vilification.  At the same time, one needs to be able to call a spade a spade (so to speak).  Where would we be if Thomas Paine, Voltaire and Jefferson had pulled verbal punches?

So this will be my place to rant.  If you don't like what I say here,  reply here or don't visit.  Leave my FB page out of it. Having said that, while I plan to give wide latitude to people who vehemently disagree, my tolerance is not unlimited.  Stay respectful, avoid ad hominid attacks,  and there will likely be no issues.