Avoiding Assumptions; We Are Ruled By Emotions

“No amount of observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white, but the observation of a single black swan is sufficient to refute that conclusion.” – Re-phrased by John Stuart Mill from philosopher David Hume

I only highlight this problem of induction to advocate one of my principles in avoiding assumptions. In accordance with the above, someone wouldn’t be able to say: “No swans are black, I have seen thousands and found none.” After all, the saying that “all swans are white”, can be easily refuted by just one incident of a counterexample. And indeed, a swan variety of a black color known as Cygnus atratus was eventually discovered in Australia. What I took from this was perhaps to remind myself to avoid the dangers of assumptions, often paralleled with the common usage of induction. To remember to reserve judgment on things of which I have experienced very little of. To never fully depend on the assumption of one’s capabilities based on mere statistics or what’s written on paper. I feel it is far better to experience things first-hand and hands-on, before attempting to discern any significant conclusions.

When evaluating such matters, whether it be a person, a policy, or a place, I also try to remain as level-headed as possible. But this has proven to be immensely tricky. I am fully convinced that we are all guided by our emotions. Nassim Nicholas Taleb wrote, “our actions are not quite guided by the parts of our brain that dictate rationality. We think without emotions and there is no way around it. For the same reason, people who are otherwise rational engage in smoking or in fights that get them no immediate benefits.” I find this completely hilarious because it is so true. On my part, I am someone who around the midst of his college years, transformed into somewhat of a health nut, avidly hitting the gym (with little success to show for it, but hey I try) and stripping my diet of sodas, high fructose corn syrup, and any excessive sugary foods. Yet despite all this, I often laugh at how I was somehow drawn into the world of a social smoker. Clearly, my insistence on avoiding fatty foods and taking pleasure in salads over sweets did not affect my emotional decisions in indulging in the temporary buzz of a cigarette. As a health-conscious person, it just wasn’t logical! Not to mention, how many so-called logical or level-headed and educated persons do you know of, that wouldn’t think twice of giving someone a beat-down when provoked? And doing so when fully aware of the penalties they face if ever caught by a law enforcement official? I’m sure it’s at least a handful, as not many logical men and women can restrain their emotions.

Take a medical research journal, or an article from Men’s Health for example (a magazine I rarely take seriously). I browse on over to the Men’s Health website and click on the first health article I find, entitled “What If Bad Fat Is Actually Good For You?” Herein lies more eye-catching, brain-popping propaganda from the media attempting to showcase an astounding new discovery that threatens to turn the way we think about our bodies upside down. MH after all, has to do something to retain their customer base and to prevent them from reading recycled material every month. One should not assume the material they digest, despite as reliable a source it may appear, to be true. Why is it that there are so many contradictory reports from case studies every other year? How often do scientists attribute randomness to their test results? New findings could show that there is no evidence that increased intake of saturated fat leads to heart disease, and that further research is required. A medical journalist may interpret then, hypothetically, that “saturated fat does not lead to heart disease”, despite the findings’ original message. Yet, the test may not have covered a sufficiently large sample size, so its results could possibly have been affected by random noise. Or, as the article attributes, the study “observed only a correlation between two phenomena, not a clear causative link. So this left open the possibility that something else — unmeasured or unimagined — was leading to heart disease. After all, Americans did eat more fat than the Japanese, but perhaps they also consumed more sugar and white bread, and watched more television.” All in all, the original testers and their results often have their messages flipped around numerous times before it ultimately arrives on the cover of your favorite magazine stand.

When I gave the article a second glance, after snatching the quote, I couldn’t help but to observe the first two words of the article: “What If”. Does this entire article actually provide anything useful or concrete to which I can take and apply to my dieting habits? The “what if” had me already, I didn’t bother to finish the article.

The information that the media provides can be helpful, but it still remains difficult to separate the bogus reports and thoughtless propaganda from the genuine and helpful information that we all really need to hear. So when I have the time, I do my best to read things or watch the news but I have learned that it isn’t always best to immediately take to the heart what you see from a Michael Moore documentary or a Fox Nightly News update. (And this doesn’t just apply to the media; assumptions on hearsay or limited exposure are always chancy as well. Which is why initial impressions of new people are not always accurate until you spend a significant amount of time with them). After all, on a personal note, the best lessons in life I have learned have all been through first-hand experience. There simply are no substitutes for such things. As long as I heed this principle and am cognizant that I should curb my emotion (enthusiasm!) when making critical decisions, I believe better choices can be made.