The Limits of Political Reasoning

“However, regardless of it being mathematically the same task, the politically charged task’s results came out in a polarized fashion…”

Introduction

Most of us assume that we hold the correct beliefs, can formulate rational arguments, and typically make logical decisions and judgements. Often, this is indeed the case. Sometimes, however, we fall victim to cognitive biases and heuristics (i.e., mental shortcuts that are meant to reduce the use of cognitive resources). And, when this happens, we are often completely unaware of the fact that we are falling victim to them. Displaying these biases and heuristics can give others the impression that we lack the necessary information or intelligence to arrive at the correct conclusion. Some may even believe that—when we are suffering from them—we have become completely irrational, even if this is rather unlikely.

Given the importance of using objective and rational methods of argumentation in political discourse, my goal with this piece is to draw attention to a particular heuristic that might lead to unnecessary disagreements. Furthermore, I’ll discuss another phenomenon that suggests—in a comparable manner to the heuristic—how our beliefs are influenced by, in this case, our tribal loyalty towards our peer groups.

The Affect Heuristic

The affect heuristic is an excellent example of how irrational attitudes influence judgements. The term, which was coined by the psychologist Paul Slovic and his colleagues, tells us how our subjective and emotional interpretations of a stimulus (e.g., a certain topic, statement, belief, technology, law, regulation, etc.) might affect our eventual judgement of that particular stimulus. For instance, a 1978 study by Slovic and his co-researchers revealed how people generally exhibit a positive attitude towards non-nuclear electric power—contrary to its nuclear counterpart. This particular attitude makes most people view non-nuclear electric power as highly beneficial and relatively low on risks. Because of our greater familiarity with non-nuclear electric power, most people perceive it as the “Abel” of types of electrical power, without taking into account the actual risks it holds. Due to a relative lack of familiarity with nuclear power, participants in the study overestimated its risk.