One of the less remarked
things about being human beings is that, though we are capable of rational
thought, we don’t like, avoid doing it, and frequently fail when we attempt it.
When examined, this is not
too surprising. We are part of the
animal kingdom, and possess animal brains.
Animal’s brains do usually work well at guiding behavior in a world
where they have to find shelter and food, and avoid becoming food, processes that don’t seem to require much abstract
reasoning. Instead, survival in the wild
seems to require emotion, awareness, perception, pattern recognition, and
association.
Our brains strongly resemble
those of other animals, and we get along fairly well at surviving “in the
wild,” which includes primitive human societies. We have agricultural societies down too. But the very capacities that make it possible
for us to survive in such societies make it hard for us to think about
them. When thinking, we generally have
to be ‘interested’ in the subject, which is another way of saying emotionally
involved. But if we’re emotionally
involved, we tend to be attracted to some ideas, and repelled by others,
leading to all sorts of misunderstandings and errors.
For example, in order to
discuss the origin of WWI rationally, the discussants need to seek answers to
questions such as ‘What was the situation at the time? What did the people involved think the situation was? Who were the decision makers in the eight
countries immediately involved? What
were they trying to accomplish? And how
did they expect to further their goals with the choices they made?’ What usually gets asked instead is ‘Who was
to blame for this catastrophe?’ And the
answer offered is usually whatever makes the person answering feel good,
regardless of the evidence.
