Subscribe for updates

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Jonathan Haidt, Righteous Minds - an update

Back in January of 2016, I posted a review here on Jonathan Haidt's book: The Righteous Mind :
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2016/02/why-are-those-idiots-from-other.html

I have continued reading around and about him, and have stumbled on a few more things that I thought folks might find interesting. One of my problems with the book is that he explains the PROBLEM very well, but offers NOTHING that we can do about it.

Progressives and conservatives have the same moral values, but they put very different weights on them. Those values are, just as a refresher:


The five foundations of morality:
  • Harm / Care.
  • Fairness / Reciprocity.
  • In Group Loyalty. Only humans can form very large groups, which was a major step in enabling us to create civilization.
  • Authority / Respect.
  • Purity / Sanctity. Sex on the right, food on the left.
The key thing to remember here is that "he is NOT making this up". This is based on excellent research, corroborated by many others. 

BUT in the book, he presented NO idea on how we might overcome this tendency to divide us. People tend to fall down on a decision based on their leaning - the elephant is going there - your brain as the driver is not in charge. And when we are offered facts or opinions that run counter to the things we believe based on our moral values, we tend to reject them out of hand, with the result that our beliefs are even more entrenched. 

This is not a good way to achieve consensus and factual understanding of our problems and issues.

I just found a talk by Haidt (thank you Reddit) that presents some additional information and some recommendations on how we might actually start to bridge this gap in our society. He has 4 recommendations in there that hit me just right.


These are Jonathan Haidt's recommendations for bridging the divide between progressive and conservative morality values:  12/2016

1 - Reduce role of money in politics.
2 - Decentralize: Subsidiarity plus experimentalism
3 - Cut 2 years of high school math; replace with economics and statistics
4 - Increase viewpoint diversity in the academy: expose students to multiple moral matrices.
===============================
My comments: AMEN.

1 - money in politics - We want politicians amenable to the public, not the big corporations and wealthy only. The democracy is literally at risk if the rank and file feel that they are NOT represented. That is the whole genius of democracy: the sense that the government is responsive to my issues and concerns - plus protecting minority rights, of course. Overturn Citizens United by legislation. Reduce the funds required for campaigning at ALL levels by public funding, setting maximums, reducing time periods, etc. Some other form of democratic representation might even be called for at some point that can narrow the scope. See my suggestions here: https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2012/11/i-hate-elections.html
2 - decentralize. Haidt mentions Fractured Republic by Yuval Levin. Push responsibility down to the lowest level possible. And at the same time, subsidize more experiments on how we do things. I have not read that book yet, but the idea makes sense. Keep it as local as you can. Set guidelines and standards for broader areas, and have escape mechanisms where local control is abused, using audits, etc. It makes a lot of sense. People can also act a bit more civilly when they actually get to know each other - see M. Scott Peck on that one: The Different Drum.

3 - Cut 2 years of high school math; replace with economics and statistics
Amen again. I never did get much practical use out of trigonometry and solid geometry. I never took calculus, which they are pushing now at this level. These courses might be useful as a kind of test to see if you have the brain for math. I do not have a that kind of brain, and I suspect a lot of us do not. BUT economics and statistics, which I have had to learn on my own through reading, are almost essential to rational thought about our world. I would just caution that economics has to be more than a history overview course - it has to reach at least to Behavioral Economics so we understand the interplay of our psychological limitations and our economic decision making. People in elected offices make completely stupid claims daily about simple things like trade, the lump of labor fallacy, currency as wealth, etc. I am under the impression that most of them have no clue how currency exchange works around the world, let alone in the Fed. And most economic schools of thought are not science - they are more like religious beliefs. I would also be tempted to throw in a bit of psycho-social research on our fundamental tribal nature. But that might fit in the religious category below.

4 - Increase viewpoint diversity in the Academy. Absolutely. We need progressives and conservatives who can talk to each other civilly, and can challenge each other. We also need psychopaths and people with autism. (Look that one up!) We all have a key role to play in moving our society forward - we can’t get there if we are not all active participants. One way to begin is to expose students to the psycho - social research of the source of our moral values, and how to gain empathy with the other side. A nice course in polite civility as essential to communication might be a start. And I would do one on comparative religion if it were my dime. Way too many of us think that our view of the deity is the only viable one.

So there - a glimmer of a way forward. Haidt is working on a new book - I suspect he will have more suggestions in there.

What say you all about this approach? Any better ideas?

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

World Bank Report On World Development - 2015 - Excellent

World Development Report
MIND, SOCIETY, AND BEHAVIOR
By World Bank Group 2015

Introduction
The World Bank has got it!! This report is a marriage of Behavioral Economics, Neuroscience and Culture and Development. And it also understands the need to “reframe” ideas to get them understood.  It talks about all of their research, and has over 100 concrete examples of how this is actually working around the world. It has specific recommendations for all manner of programs. I saw ONE of these in operation In Nicaragua. Kairos presented a lock box to the communities they work with to help them save for a goal. That simple contribution increased their savings rates enormously. There are hundreds of examples like that in this report.

I found the social interaction examples the most informative. I had not realized how much we are driven by our social ties, and how important they are for any kind of organization or effort. I was also surprised at how effective participant control was as opposed to governmental control. Even building the scorecard or measuring tool WITH the participants had a major impact on the results.

This one example is particularly fun:


I highly recommend this report to anyone working on economic development or community organizing  anywhere - developed or developing countries. OR anyone that wonders if Behavioral Economics has a future! The World Bank is using it extensively. It is also a wonderful introduction to modern psychological /social research replete with concrete examples.

This introduction to the report is a LOT longer than I ever intended. It is mostly for my own purposes - I think better when I process information. If you are not yet convinced that you need to read the report, do continue on here. BUT I highly recommend you just go get the thing. It isn’t that long! You can do it - I’m counting on you.

One thing I learned for sure, do not underestimate the power of the daily soap - radio or TV. Several of the stories in here relate to profound economic changes that were encouraged by means of soap opera story lines! It may be that the effect does not last long, but it is a start.

This is a BIG DEAL
I think this report is a very big deal.  I have been reading and thinking about economic development since I had the opportunity to visit Tanzania with my son in 2000. I did a little research then, and found some work by sociologists that seemed to understand what was going on. I wrote a bit about that in this blog entry - with some stories, which I continue to relate to friend and foe alike. You might still enjoy it.

As I continued reading in the field of poverty and economics, I stumbled onto Behavioral Economics through a couple of books recommended by our local newspaper’s economist columnist, and then I got into some neuroscience as it became increasingly clear that we humans are not really rational beings. I thank all the people who recommended these books to me. Here’s a bit of a summary of some of that which I had done some time ago. I put a list of the books at the end of this - in case I forget!

I AM DONE
And now I have found this World Bank report - and I can stop and move on. I can’t believe this has been out there for over a year and I never heard about it. This takes the culture stuff, the economics stuff and the neurological stuff, and wraps it all together in a wonderful synthesis. This report is an excellent review of the scientific literature around human behavior, and how it affects societies and their economic and social development. It is replete with examples and recommendations. If you are at all engaged in development issues around the globe, this should be your bible for the near future. And the amazing thing is that this is NOT rocket science. Many of the things pointed out here are very simple to implement, assuming you understand how humans actually work. A simple change in how something is presented can have a profound effect on how it is perceived and whether it is implemented.

For a better summary of the contents, read this brief “about”:

How To Get Your Copy
A free copy of the report in PDF format is here:
This is the official site for the document, but you cannot download it there. But there are a lot of other resources, such as synopsis, audio versions, background reports, etc.
ALL world bank documents are here:

The Video Introduction and Presentation
There is a video of the official introduction of this report. I love how the speaker introduces it. Advertisers and politicians understand this information well, but economics has been ignoring it. Politicians use this to get elected, but then forget about it. The speakers recount many of the studies in the report that are quite amazing.
Well worth your time: (do not PAUSE the video - doesn’t work, and it may die at some point.)
If you have problems with that video, try this one:
https://youtu.be/1_bjG9zqzQ4

You can find a lot of YouTube videos about this report if you search YouTube for “world development report 2015”. Several in Spanish!!

Findings Summary
We have discovered three basic things about human beings and how they think:
  1. People think automatically, using mental shortcuts most of the time.
  2. People think socially, on the basis of social norms and under social influences.
  3. People think in mental models, drawn from their society and shared history.
There is a pattern to how people think, and advertisers use this all the time. If we understand the pattern, we can better help people to do the things that really promote their well being.

Excerpts
From the Foreword:
Many development economists and practitioners believe that the “irrational” elements of human decision making are inscrutable or that they cancel each other out when large numbers of people interact, as in markets. Yet, we now know this is not the case. Recent research has advanced our understanding of the psychological, social, and cultural influences on decision making and human behavior and has demonstrated that they have a significant impact on development outcomes.

And this is from the Overview:
The title of this Report, Mind, Society, and Behavior, captures the idea that paying attention to how humans think (the processes of mind) and how history and
context shape thinking (the influence of society) can improve the design and implementation of development policies and interventions that target human choice and action (behavior). To put it differently, development policy is due for its own redesign based on careful consideration of human factors.
. . .
The Report draws on findings from many disciplines, including neuroscience, cognitive science, psychology, behavioral economics, sociology, political science, and anthropology. In ongoing research, these findings help explain decisions that individuals make in many aspects of development, including savings, investment, energy consumption, health, and child rearing. The findings also enhance the understanding of how collective behaviors—such as widespread trust or widespread corruption—develop and become entrenched in a society.
. . .

This Report discusses how taking the human factors more completely into account in decision making sheds light on a number of areas: the persistence of poverty, early childhood development, household finance, productivity, health, and climate change. The framework and many examples in the Report show how impediments to people’s ability to process information and the ways societies shape mindsets can be sources of development disadvantage but also can be changed. The three ways of thinking emphasized here apply equally to all human beings. They are not limited to those at higher or lower income levels, or to those at higher or lower educational levels, or to those in high-income or low-income countries. Numerous examples from high -income countries throughout this Report demonstrate the universality of psychological and social influences on decision making. The Report documents the cognitive limitations of people in all walks of life, including World Bank staff (see spotlight 3 and chapter 10 ). Development professionals themselves think automatically, think socially, and think with mental models and, as a result, may misidentify the causes of behavior and overlook potential solutions to development problems. Development organizations could be more effective if practitioners became aware of their own biases and if organizations implemented procedures that mitigate their effects.

The three ways of thinking emphasized here apply equally to all human beings. They are not limited to those at higher or lower income levels, or to those at higher or lower educational levels, or to those in high income or low-income countries. Numerous examples from high-income countries throughout this Report demonstrate the universality of psychological and social influences on decision making.


Mental Models
One of their findings is that “climate” is a mental model - it is something we derive from experience, not reading or learning. It takes an enormous actual change in our experience weather to persuade us rationally that things are not as they were. Page 160 has an extensive piece on the climate change problem.

“Free” is also a mental model - if you want it done, make it FREE. A few pennies will not work.

Social awards work better than financial incentives. People will work harder to get a gold star and higher ranking with their peers, than they will for a 10 cent payment.

Mental ability can change over 10 IQ points, depending on the person’s financial situation, stress level, etc. So when they are offered a decision is very important.

The research and examples of “mental models” is very well done. The history of the slave trade in western Africa left a negative effect in the society’s level of trust. Page 65:
Thus the Atlantic slave trade turned brothers against each other, chiefs against subjects, and judges against defendants. Lower levels of trust in some parts of Africa today are related to the intensity of slave trading centuries ago. Regions that were more susceptible to slave raids due to accidental features of geography have lower levels of trust today—trust toward strangers, friends, relatives, and institutions (Nunn 2008; Nunn and Wantchekon 2011).

This one should also get your attention. P. 65
Working women are viewed more favorably in societies that did not have the plough than in societies that did, and they represent a higher share of the labor force.
Why? Because it required considerably more upper body strength to manage a plow, and it became the male role. The effect persists long after the manual plow is gone.

The profound impact of the level of trust in a society is also pretty amazing. Where trust is weak so is economic development. Weak constraints on the ruling group also correlates very highly with poverty. Think of the “hierarchical” social structure imposed by the Catholic Church in the former Spanish colonies! When leaders are regarded with more respect, they tend to be more corrupt, and the society and the society has less trust and development.

Early Childhood Mental Stimulation - see page 34. Mental stimulation at an early age is essential to the development of both cognitive skills - the automatic and the deliberative. So a reading problem for the children will benefit them throughout life.
Very early childhood stimulation has a large impact on adult success in the labor market, a 20-year study in Jamaica found (Gertler and others 2014). Community health workers made weekly home visits to teach mothers how to play and interact with their children in ways that promote cognitive and emotional development. Children who were randomly selected to participate in the program earned 25 percent more as adults than those in the control group who did not participate in the program—enough to close the earnings gap with a population that was not disadvantaged.

Page 40. They discuss the question as to why the government should intervene to help people, rather than letting them decide for themselves. I have seen this discussion in Thaler’s book on economics, but here is their summary of the problem. There is a MUCH more extensive analysis of this question on page 202. (Sorry for the length of this one.)
First, shaping choices can help people obtain their own goals. Reminders to save or take medicine help people who are otherwise caught up in life achieve objectives that they themselves have set. Commitment contracts, which markets under provide, can reinforce decisions to adopt healthful behaviors. Matching the timing of social transfers to the timing of charges for school enrollment, or making it easier to buy fertilizer at harvest time when cash is at hand, can help overcome the divide between intentions and actions for people who may be forgetful or possess insufficient willpower (that is to say, all of us). Many development policies that operate at the boundary of economics and psychology can be understood in those terms.

Second, individuals’ preferences and immediate aims do not always advance their own interests. Individuals might choose differently, in ways more consistent with their highest aspirations, if they had more time and scope for reflection. Third, socially reinforced practices and mental models can block choices that enhance agency and promote well-being and thus prevent individuals from even conceiving of certain courses of action—as when discrimination can sometimes lead people, understandably, to adopt low aspirations. Governments should act when inadequate engagement, situational framing, and social practices undermine agency and create or perpetuate poverty. Although development actors have legitimate differences on some of these issues and place different weights on individual freedoms and collective goals, widely shared and ratified human rights constitute a guiding principle for addressing these trade-offs.

Not every psychological or social insight calls for more government intervention; some call for less. Because policy makers are themselves subject to cognitive biases, they should search for and rely on sound evidence that their interventions have their intended effects, and allow the public to review and scrutinize their policies and interventions, especially those that aim to shape individual choice. Still, it is not the case that when governments refrain from action, individuals freely and consistently make choices in their own best interest, uninfluenced by anyone else. Any number of interested parties exploit people’s tendency to think automatically, succumb to social pressure, and rely on mental models (Akerlof and Shiller, forthcoming), including moneylenders, advertisers, and elites of all types. In that context, governmental inaction does not necessarily leave space for individual freedom; rather, government inaction may amount to an indifference to the loss of freedom (Sunstein 2014).

Climate Change
Page 160. There is a particularly insightful piece on why climate change opinions are so difficult to change. It has to do with worldview and social networks, much more than scientific information. There is a distinct tendency among “hierarchical individuals” (See Jonathan Haidt on that one) because those folks lean toward tradition, strong leaders, and the like. And tend to reject any new information that runs counter to those things. We typically call that conservatism! So presenting information, cleverly, clearly, or however, may have absolutely no impact on how this subgroup sees reality. In my research, it may even strengthen their existing opinions. For example, some people are less likely to buy the same light bulb for the same price if it is labeled as “environmentally friendly”. Honest.

Positive
I cannot say enough about how well done this report is. It includes the very best research that impacts human development - economics, neuroscience, farming, politics, social media. And it uses examples from developed AND developing countries. We often tend to put down people in developing countries as though there is something wrong with them. We really are all the same, although we are operating in different social, and mental models.
The report is also very well organized. Each topic has an introduction, some details, and a summary, plus references to the actual research. The references also make it appear to be a lot longer than it actually is.
The other good thing is that we have only begun to scratch the surface on how our brains work, and how our social interactions empower and control us. We may actually be able to manage this thing called civilization yet. There is hope.

Poverty and Decisions. The second chapter treatment of the problems facing the poor in simply making any decision is very well done - very empathic. It should be very helpful to anyone working with the poor in any location. One of the things I learned is that my parish’s relationship with a poor community in Nicaragua does a lot more for their mental capacity than it does directly for their financial well being, and the effect is much more enduring. The measured impact of really brief positive affirmation is simply amazing - amazing. See p. 85!
Page 89 Poverty can contribute to a mindset that can make it difficult for people to realize their own potential to take advantage of existing opportunities. It is important to consider how the process of delivering services or targeting poor people could be creating poor frames that further demotivate potential beneficiaries. A good place to start would be the names of programs and identification cards associated with them. “Needy families,” for example, could be replaced with “families in action,” or “poor cards” with “opportunity cards.”


Negative
While they grasp the idea of “mental models”, something I call our “worldview” or simply culture, they do not give it the full weight which it deserves. The models in our head are so powerful that we rarely even see that they are a model or a view. We simply see that this is how life works. The leaders in a specific culture are also suffering under the same mental models, and may be unable to even see them as a problem. And I am not so sure that the mental model of saving or long term perspective can be as easily changed as some of their experiments indicate. But  . . . this is light years beyond every other approach to the problem that I have seen.

There is a bit of repetition in the different portions of the report, citing the same problems or examples several times. BUT . . . it is a decent pedagogical approach.

Original Research
Most of the document is a summary of other research projects around the globe. But they group also initiated some original research in the area of how poverty itself affects decision making. Most of the psychological research utilizes college students in elite universities - they are a little “WEIRD” - western educated, industrialized society, rich, democratic. So the group undertook to replicate some of their work with other populations. It turns out that poor people are quite different from their richer co-citizens, and quite similar across nationalities in how they think about economic opportunities. See page 94.

Effect of Poverty on Childhood Development
This was an eye opener for me. I had read about the effect of poverty on the development of a child’s body and brain, but had not thought about the learning patterns, decision making, and things that affect their ability to make decisions for their entire life. P. 98
They are also likely to have had less opportunity to develop the critical skills—including skills in controlling their impulses, understanding the perspectives of other people, and focusing attention—that are important for engaging effectively with teachers and other children, paying attention in class, completing assignments, and behaving appropriately.
. . .
Finally, the chapter reports evidence that early childhood interventions can mitigate the effects of impoverished environments on children.
. . .
Page 99. Do the wealth gaps in children’s skills narrow over time? The evidence to date indicates they do not.

This chapter alone is well worth your time to read, whatever your role in life. They cite numerous studies that indicate that poverty affects children for their entire lives - partially from nutrition, but also in many other ways that it hinders their abilities. The differences are also culturally based. Different tribes in Kenya have different behaviors toward their infants, and the children’s skills are vastly different as a result. See page 103! SO, a fundamental part of progress here lies in pre-school learning, school teaching methods, and parenting skills. Talk about changing the world! Anti poverty programs have to reach beyond providing nutrition and money! Some cultures believe that talking to infants is inappropriate. How does one change that? One key finding is that it is important to persuade parents and caregivers that the intelligence and abilities of their children are very malleable, and not set in stone. How they are treated in childhood will deteremine their capabilities.


And check out the statistics on “home team advantage” on page 184!

Wednesday, March 29, 2017

World Bank Research on Behavioral Development Economics

If you have been following along here - and you are a small and priceless group - thank you for that - you would know that I am fascinated by the idea that the economic differences on the planet come, in large part, from how we think about things. I call it our "world view", or how we think things work. The Western, "developed" world has a different framework in their heads than the "developing" world. A sociologist named Hoffstede stumbled on this basic idea, and now a few people have been applying it to assist with development projects around the world.

I wrote a couple of pieces on that here based on my own experience - not formal research by any means. You can find that here:
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2014/03/culture-is-key-to-development.html 


I have also been reading in psychology, and in behavioral economics, which, as it turns out, are closely related. There are some posts here on those topics as well.
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2016/12/economics-dismal-science-and-how-they.html
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2013/03/thinking-fast-and-slow-book-report.html

Economics coupled with the latest psychological insights has developed something called Behavioral Economics. It is based on the latest psychological research which indicates that we are not very rational - hardly. We act spontaneously, without a lot of thought about it, etc. The book Nudge was written by one of the leading proponents of this school, Richard Thaler.  

In Thaler's latest book, Misbehaving, he talks about applying this idea of actual research into what works with normal humans in the world of development economics. It turns out, if you structure a deal one way, many more people will take it up, than if you do it the other way - the "rational" way. Humans are NOT rational. Better to design things for the way we work, but it takes research to figure that out! Of which we have precious little in the real world. The whole Millennium Village thing was theory based - precious little actual trial and error.

Both of those books are fun reads by the way - Thaler writes well and keeps a sense of humour about it all.

I looked about to try to come up some behavioral research for economic development. The genius of this is that sometimes tiny things make a big difference. For instance, in one example from educational research, if you set up a bonus program for good teachers, it works MUCH better to give them the bonus up front, rather than at the end. If the kids do not measure up, then you take the bonus back. You get a much higher achievement by the students simply because humans HATE to let go of something they have, but can easily ignore something they do not have yet. It just FEELS totally different. I was wondering what kind of things exist in the world of development - and the World Bank does too! So they published a study. Amazing.

The book is, "World Development Report 2015: Mind, Society, and Behavior" by the World Bank.

The book is at Amazon, and there is a way to read the introduction and the table of contents. I am interested in reading it, but I have a small pile of books in front of it. And I am just an interested bystander, after all. 

You can read the first part here for free: http://a.co/9EupGcU  
If you want to read the whole introduction, and the table of contents, you will need to get a preview in a Kindle reader. You can get a Kindle reader on almost any device - phone, computer, etc. 

 If you want a Kindle reader on your iPad or computer or phone - here's where to get that.
http://amzn.to/1r0LubW

See what you think, and let me know.

Remember, we are all in this together, and I'm pulling for you.

-----------------------------
For some reason I cannot post comments to my own posts. Gotta look at that.
But I want to tell folks that if you are at all interested in this topic, I discovered that the World Bank spent 2 years pursuing a research project on how modern neuroscience and behavioral economics might impact their efforts to encourage economic and social development around the globe. They published the results of that work in 2015, in a really fine monograph. I HIGHLY recommend it for anyone interested in economic development, global poverty, and the like. 

For a summary of the contents, read this brief “about”:
http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2015/about#1   

A free copy of the report in PDF format is here:

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/645741468339541646/World-development-report-2015-mind-society-and-behavior


Friday, March 10, 2017

Stages of Faith / Belief and Political and Economic Beliefs

I just read a commentary by David Felten on the book, Stages of Faith by James Fowler, which helped me a bit in the midst of our current crisis of political / economic craziness. You might find it also of some benefit. This is chart of the Fowler stages.

http://www.psychologycharts.com/james-fowler-stages-of-faith.html

This was mentioned in a Bishop Spong post - the good bishop has stopped doing weekly essays, and working on his latest book. So others are filling in for him. The 3/8/2017 comment by Felten mentioned this book, and applied this insight into maturing religious beliefs to, of all things, political "beliefs". I found it helpful. I could not find another published commentary like this by Felten, so I am reduced to giving you a brief summary of what he said. The Spong essay is a for-fee group, which you can find here, if you are interested. It was entitled:
The author has a good command of how Twitter works, and is well aware of the current brouhaha with traditional news sources, so it is also fun to read. BUT  . . . you have to be a paying member. I am reduced here to a few quotes of salient points.

Basically, he discussed the recent problems of "fake news" and "alternative facts" as they are being bandied about by the somewhat erratic defenders of our current elected fearless leader. He referenced this book about the development and maturing of religious beliefs as a way to better understand what is going on in the realm of political "beliefs". That alone is a major step - recognizing that we humans do not do "rational" things with political ideas, any more than we do with religious ones or economic ones. There is excellent research supporting that - and I have made a few comments in this space about that. I am persuaded that the "science" of economics is much better understood as a collection of "schools of belief" - people defend their position in the face of any amount of contrary information. Politics is exactly like that. Our brains treat it the same way.

If you read the post above about the stages of religious development, it makes some sense. I do not know if these are based on any hard research or science, or whether they are simply the reflections of the author - but they FEEL good to me. They follow along with the stages defined by the work of Piaget, and Kohlberg, M. Scott Peck and Erickson.

Kohlberg's work is very similar around how people make moral or ethical decisions. We seem to grow from self centered individuals, to ones more focused on peers and our tribe, to a final, mature adult who can, pretty much, think and operate independently of these influences. I think the key is our increased empathy with others. And that we seem to "grow up" in different realms at different speeds, so we might be at one stage in one part of life, like religion, and in another in our political, or economic. But  . . . they are all belief systems, so . . .

The author sees the source of this problem in Christianity and the bizarre belief system people set up to maintain their simplistic, mythic beliefs in the face of modern science and knowledge. But, in fact, humans are just this way. Christianity had nothing to do with it. It takes a LOT of work to do things rationally. It takes more than just the passage of time to move someone up the scale of belief, be it in the realm of religion or politics. And we have yet to discover a better mechanism for teaching people how to grow up, as it were, in this realm. I remain hopeful that we will eventually figure this out, but we have come a long way just to recognize the problem.

Here are a few pithy excerpts from the essay:
  • As many Christians grow up, they are expected to believe that the biblical story of “Noah’s flood is actually a historical, factual account” – despite the impossible logistics and the appalling theology. Every day, countless fundamentalist Christians congratulate themselves for being able to suspend disbelief and embrace the “divine wisdom” of an all-loving and gracious God committing global genocide.
  • In analyzing people’s susceptibility to “fake news,” Christopher Douglas notes that this tendency has its historical origin in Christian fundamentalism’s rejection of expert elites.” While many Catholics and Mainline Protestants have taken the last 150 years of expert Biblical and theological scholarship to heart, Fundamentalism has proudly embraced the rejection of science and rational thought as a badge of honor – oftentimes creating whole universes of “alternative facts” (the so-called “Biblical Worldview”) to defend a literal 6-day creation, intelligent design, and Jesus’ literal virgin birth and physical resurrection.
  • So, as in our current political sphere, no matter how articulate Progressive Christians are in expressing the wisdom of Progressive Christianity, Fundamentalist Christians will simply never come around. Never. After all, their very identity is, in part, rooted in the ability to not only dismiss any evidence that contradicts their worldview (fake news!), but to double down on the veracity of their “alternative facts.” As objective and well-grounded as Progressive Christian apologists might be in pointing out the shortcomings of a Fundamentalist mindset, it will make no difference. Theological liberals can choose to continue the debate, but to what end? Any serious conversation is doomed before it starts, a casualty of the war between two irreconcilable tribes.

The author does not have a real "solution" to how these folks operate, but rather one for the rest of us, who see the problem. His suggestion is that we need to let go of the idea that we are right, and they are wrong. These are just different "views" or "stages" of the problem. To quote again:
  • Once liberated from the dualism of being “right or wrong,” there’s no need to try and convince a Stage 3 person of anything. Simply be who you are where you are on the spiritual journey. Don’t be deterred from being a person on the way to Stage 6 for fear of offending someone in Stage 2. Just get on with it. We no longer need to feel the urge to give in to our tribal impulse to prove others wrong and ourselves right.
  • If we’re familiar enough with Fowler’s stages, we can endure a sermon that is theologically medieval and resist the urge to shout, “You’re WRONG!” Instead, we can simply acknowledge, “Wow, that was a seriously “Stage 2” sermon. There may even be an opportunity to demonstrate some Stage 5 compassion by empathizing with the pastor: “I know she’s a Stage 5 Christian, but the demographic of her church is Stage 3. That must be really hard on her spiritual integrity to preach to where people are rather than where she’d like them to be…”.
  • Think of how helpful a “Stages” labeling system could be. For the benefit of the consumer, whole churches or denominations could be designated as Stage 2, 3, 4, or 5 – saving people a lot of grief in choosing a faith community. Like English 101 or 102, Bible studies could be identified as Stage 4 or Stage 5. Perhaps truth-in-advertising would lead to announcements indicating “WARNING: Stage 2 Bible Study!”

#tremendous #huge

It reminds me somewhat of my "rules of thumb for life". This is the way things are - stop worrying about it, there's no way to change it. You can adapt to it, but you can't "fix" the other person, because there is really nothing wrong with them. They are where they are. It would be like trying to introduce the idea of economic interdependency to a 2 year old. You are better off talking about the tooth fairy and Santa Claus to convey the idea. BUT, it still upsets me that we have elected fearless leaders that seem to be perpetually stuck in stage 1 or 2, not even up to the "normal" level of 3. I am somewhat similarly upset that I cannot explain the Santa myth to a child, but I can live with it!

The other side of that, it would be a great mistake to just write off all of those "immature" humans who do not agree with my "rational" approach. There is little to be gained in that. Rather, this helps a bit to really get inside how they see things, and understand that they are NOT the enemy, NOT stupid, NOT crazy. Since they are not going to "move forward" or "upward" in any hurry, we had best be about trying to speak at their level if we want to make any progress at all.

But I am persuaded that we might yet find a way out of this perpetual gut instinct thing. I have seen some research that "mindfulness" or "meditation" in almost any form provides people with more empathy, and more openness to the views of others - offering the slim hope that we might be able construct social mechanisms of education or the like that will actually move us forward as a society. That is, as soon as we fix the serious structural problems with our economic systems and form of government. Or perhaps not. We shall see.