Don McMinn

Question: Which line in the box on the right is the same length as the line in the box on the left? A, B, or C?

The correct answer is obvious: C.

But that’s not the answer many people chose in an experiment conducted by social psychologist Solomon Asch.

Here’s what happened.

In 1956, Asch conducted a series of experiments in which he would invite eight people to participate in a simple “perceptual” task. The participants were shown the two boxes you just looked at. Each were then asked to say aloud which line in box two matched the length of the line in box one.  

But seven of the participants were actors and only one was the “subject.” Before the experiments began, the actors were told how to respond; the subject gave his own answer. The group was seated such that the subject always responded last. 

When all seven actors unanimously chose a wrong answer (A or B), 36.8% of the time, the subject agreed with their response, even though it was obviously the wrong answer. 

The experiments revealed the degree to which a person’s own opinions are influenced by those of groups. Asch found that people were willing to ignore reality and give an incorrect answer in order to conform to the rest of the group.  

At the conclusion of the experiments, participants were asked why they had gone along with the rest of the group. In most cases, the students stated that while they knew the rest of the group was wrong, they did not want to risk facing ridicule. A few of the participants suggested that they actually believed the other members of the group were correct in their answers.

When asked his opinion regarding the study results, Asch said, “That intelligent, well-meaning, young people are willing to call white black is a matter of concern.”

This experiment exposes our vulnerability to peer pressure, groupthink, herd mentality, and tribal influence. It should prompt us to be independent thinkers and courageous conversationalists.  

 

“In everyone’s life, at some time, our inner fire goes out. It is then burst into flame by an encounter with another human being. We should all be thankful for those people who rekindle the inner spirit.” Albert Schweitzer

Please reread what Schweitzer wrote. It is significant. 

I memorized his thought about 25 years ago. It meant a lot to me then. It means even more to me now because I’ve experienced both sides of the equation—one whose inner fire has gone out and one who helps another person whose fire has been extinguished.

There was a time when my inner fire went out. For about six months in my mid-forties, I became clinically depressed. I thought my life was over. I was bewildered and hopeless. My wife and two daughters helped me through the darkness. Antidepressants also helped.

For the past five years, I’ve helped a friend whose “inner fire” went out. Over the course of about 10 years his life slowly but inexorably ground to a stop. He became hopelessly adrift. Unemployed, bankrupt, destitute, undiagnosed mental illness, legal problems, and finally homeless. 

In my heart I made a commitment to come alongside him and help. It’s been the most difficult thing I’ve ever done. At times I’ve wanted to give up, as has he.

But now his “inner spirit has been rekindled.” He still has a long way to go, but he’s on track and every day is a step in the right direction. My friend has been incredibly courageous and determined in his recovery. Few people have overcome so many major and persistent obstacles as he has.  

I think my part in assisting his comeback will be one of the finest and proudest endeavors of my life. 

At some point in your life, your inner fire will go out. Pray that someone will be there to help you.

At one or several times in your life, you’ll be compelled to help someone else whose fire has been extinguished. You can’t commit to help everyone who is needful, but you can do it once or twice in your life. 

Granted, it usually takes a “village” to help someone get out of a deep pit, but one person needs to lead the effort. One person must say, “I’m going to take hold of my friend and not let go.” 

Binary thinking, also known as dichotomous thinking, occurs when concepts, ideas, and problems are overly simplified and put into only two categories. It wrongly presumes that there are only two sides to most issues and that only one side can be right.

For instance, politically, most Americans choose to align with one of two parties: Republican or Democratic. Relative to climate change, there are deniers and believers. Is coffee good for you or bad for you? Every religion has multiple subsets of binary categories: Are you pre-tribulation or post-tribulation? Sunni or Shia? If you’re a Jew do you believe in the afterlife or not?

Cable TV channels are notorious for perpetuating binary thinking. They present issues as black and white with no gray area. When was the last time you heard a Fox News or MSNBC broadcaster say, “This is a complicated issue, so let’s take the time to consider all sides of this story.”  

The truth is, most issues are best considered on a continuum of information and perspectives, but a basic human tendency is to reduce complex concepts, ideas, and problems into two categories. Instead of wrestling with a complex continuum we simply create two extremes. And once we choose a position we double down on it, creating an us versus them mentality.

Why do we fall prey to binary bias?

• It’s a mental shortcut. Instead of taking the time to investigate all the aspects of a particular issue, it’s easier and quicker to simply reduce it to only two positions and embrace one.  
• We may want to bring closure to an issue, so we quickly create two extreme positions and choose one. 
• We are susceptible to herd mentality and we readily accept the position of our tribe. 
• We have a need for clarification and certainty so we seek the reassurance of an either-or classification. Richard Dawkins calls this “the tyranny of the discontinuous mind.” Instead, we should become comfortable with ambiguity and complex continuums.  

Once we succumb to binary bias, our chosen conviction is subsequently reinforced by confirmation bias. We look for evidence that underscores our position, talk exclusively to people who share our position, and begin to demonize those who think differently. Binary thinking often leads to conflict and detachment.

How do we overcome binary bias?

• Pursue and embrace complexity and resist oversimplification. Most issues are not black and white; gray areas exist, so acknowledging complexity is a step toward understanding and credibility. 
• Engage in full-spectrum thinking. Instead of making assumptions and broad generalizations, consider the full range of perspectives on a given topic. Investigate nuances and explore gray areas. Don’t restrict yourself to just two options. 

Humorist Robert Benchley cleverly observed, “There are two kinds of people: those who divide the world into two kinds of people, and those who don’t.” Don’t be among the former.

Here’s part of a helpful article by Clay Drinko titled “7 Ways to Avoid Binary Thinking”.

My seven-year-old grandson is the center of my universe. I often tell him how much I love him, and he reciprocates. Sometimes we banter back and forth with phrases like, “I love you to the moon and back. Well, I love you to the stars and back. Well, I love you more than all the leaves on all the trees.” My favorite term of endearment spoken by Ben is, “You’re the best papa ever.”

But last week when we were at the community pool, we had an unusual episode. We were playing pick-up-the-sunken-rings with other children (colored plastic rings are thrown around the pool and the child who collects the most wins). Ben was trying, unsuccessfully, to pick up the rings with his toes, so I said, “B, you need to dive headfirst and grab them with your hands.” Then I turned him upside down and pushed him headfirst under the water. When he popped up, he shouted “I hate you. You’re the worst papa ever.” It sent a chill over the entire pool.

Days later, when we were cuddling on the coach in my study he said, “Papa, I love you. You’re the best papa ever.” I said, “Thanks B. But last week when we were at the pool, you said you hated me and I was the worst papa ever.” He matter-of-factly replied, “But Papa, I was angry.” 

Sensing a teachable moment, I taught Ben an important life lesson.

“Ben, we all have emotions. That’s a normal part of life. Sometimes we feel painful emotions—we’re sad, afraid, frustrated, angry—and sometimes we feel positive emotions—we’re happy, satisfied, grateful. It’s okay to feel both types of emotions. It’s also important to express our emotions; we need to talk about how we feel. 

“But when our emotions peak (we’re feeling very angry or very satisfied) we need to be careful with what we say and do because we may say or do something we later regret. As a matter of fact, at those times, it’s probably best that we not say or do anything until we calm down.” 

Believe it or not, I think Ben understood.

Much like an EKG machine reveals the ongoing rhythm patterns of our heart, I often visualize a similar scale that would show our emotional patterns. 

The horizontal baseline represents emotional homeostasis, when neither positive nor painful emotions are dominate.  The swings up show when positive emotions are strong and the swings down show when painful emotions are predominant. 

It’s normal for our emotions to fluctuate up and down, and they can rise or fall suddenly and often. You can’t always stay above the line (it’s unhealthy to even try) and you don’t want to consistently experience life below the line. The swings up and down are normal and healthy.

But we must be careful when we peak emotionally, either up or down. At those moments we need to monitor what we say and do, and not make decisions.

Interestingly, those extremes don’t last long; they quickly subside and move back toward the baseline. Sure, we can stay moderately frustrated or angry for a while, but seldom do we stay at extreme levels.  

Recently, in a moment of frustration (I was at the bottom of the chart), I said something to my daughter that I immediately regretted and later apologized for. Recently, during a moment of pure nirvana (Ben and I were sitting on the couch in my study, memorizing poetry), I rashly said, “Ben, see all the books in my library. Someday, they will all be yours.” (I don’t regret having said that, but it was an impetuous decision prompted by peaking emotions.)

Train yourself to recognize those moments and exercise restraint. There’s wisdom in the old notion of counting to 10 when you start feeling upset. As you count, imagine that with each number, you’re reaching a new level of calmness. This will buy you some time and help you respond more prudently.