Do You Have A Protagonist Bias?

This post is for my confidant readers, not the ones suffering imposter syndrome.

This is for those who think they’re the smartest people in the room, the most moral, sensitive, correct; at any rate, it’s for those who think the world revolves around them.

Now, statistically speaking, some people who think these things aren’t arrogant—they’re simply self-aware. And there’s a level on which, yes, we are all protagonists—the world truly is made solely for us. A person whose confidence is not warranted is incompetent; a person whose confidence is warranted is a leader.

But statistically speaking, many over-estimate their powers of perception, goodness, impact, centrality. Call this the protagonist bias. If 70% of people in a room think they’re smarter than average, some are lying (or self deceived).

Now you’ve read the studies and are aware of this problem. You took Psychology 101 and learned about Dunning-Kruger Effect. You still think you’re right, righteous, better than most. So what was the point?

On moral and political matters, where people passionately disagree, both can’t be right, right? Shouldn’t the fact that there are good and thoughtful people on both sides of an issue give one pause? Someone has to be a villain? But, wait a minute, this person holding the opposite worldview as me, doesn’t look evil?

One way that people respond to this problem is to think probabilistically—tally up all the smart, good, credible people on both sides and go with the view that gets the most votes. But this begs the question—how do you decide what’s good, smart, credible? It’s turtles all the way down.

Another approach to polling the audience is “phoning a friend,” going with the testimony of one trusted expert. But are “specialization” and “expertise” the right way to think about moral and political concerns? Moreover, your decision about who to trust for your “news” and “op-eds” is also question-begging. It’s also riskier than the poll the audience approach, like picking a stock rather than buying into a mutual fund.

You could also ignore everything I’m saying and dismiss it as blasé, cocktail party relativism. But note that there’s someone else who thinks you’re wrong about everything having the same reaction.

I’m not saying we should be more morally and politically cautious, but I am saying that we should entertain the fact that in someone else’s credible and coherent mind, we may be villains. Now what?

---

What is Called Thinking? is a practice of asking a daily question on the belief that self-reflection brings awe, joy, and enrichment to one’s life. Consider becoming a subscriber to support this project and access subscriber-only content.

You can read my weekly Torah commentary here.