A clear mind sees a foggy world. A foggy mind sees a clear world.

In my previous post I talked about how science is viewed in Tim Urban's creative and engaging book, What's Our Problem? A Self-Help Book for Societies. I've continued reading the book, finding Urban's writing style highly appealing.

Here's a terrific passage that offered up a compelling way of looking upon the difference between a Scientist and a Zealot.

While the Scientist's clear mind sees a foggy world, full of complexity and nuance and messiness, the Zealot's foggy mind shows them a clear, simple world, full of crisp lines and black-and-white distinctions. When you're thinking like a Zealot, you end up in a a totally alternative reality, feeling like you're an omniscient being in total possession of the truth.

As explained in my "Your Higher Mind thinks like a Scientist" post, Urban views the Scientist's dedication to truth as the top rung of how beliefs are formed. Next comes Sports Fan, followed by Attorney, and the bottom rung, Zealot. 

Sports Fan. I was pleased to see this get such a high ranking, as I enjoy sports. I've stopped playing competitive tennis, but I like watching sports on television, primarily college football and baseball. (The University of Oregon has the #1 football team in the country!)

Urban says this about thinking like a Sports Fan.

Most real-life sports fans want the games they watch to be played fairly. They don't want corrupt referees, even if it helps their team win. They place immense value on the integrity of the process itself. It's just...that they really, really want that process to yield a certain outcome. They're not just watching the game -- they're rooting. 

When your Primitive Mind infiltrates your reasoning process, you start thinking the same way. You still believe you're starting at Point A, and you still want Point B to be the truth. But you're not exactly objective about it. Weird things happen to your thinking when the drive for truth is infected by some ulterior motive. Psychologists call it "motivated reasoning."

...Sports Fans are stubborn, but they're not hopeless. The Higher Mind is still a strong presence in their head, and if dissenting evidence is strong enough, the Sports Fan will grudgingly change their mind. Underneath all the haze of cognitive bias, Sports Fans still care mostly about finding the truth.

Drift down any further, though, and you cross the Ladder midpoint and become a different kind of thinker entirely. Down on the low rungs, the Primitive Mind has the edge in the tug-of-war.

Attorney. I've always admired how our legal system is centered around the idea that in a court of law, opposing attorneys will do their best to argue the merits of their client's case, even when the defense attorney seems to be representing an obviously guilty person or entity.

However, when it comes to thinking like an Attorney, there are downsides if our goal is truth. Urban writes:

An Attorney and a Sports Fan have things in common. They're both conflicted between the intellectual values of truth and confirmation. The critical difference is which value, deep down, they hold most sacred. 

A Sports Fan wants to win, but when pushed, cares most about truth. But it's as if an Attorney's job is to win, and nothing can alter their allegiance... When you're thinking like an Attorney, you don't start at Point A at all. You start at Point B. The client is not guilty. Now let's figure out why. 

From there, you'll go through your due diligence, cherry-picking evidence and piecing together an argument that leads right where you want it to. 

...In the hypothesis-testing phase, the Attorney's refusal to genuinely listen to a dissenter, combined with a bag of logical fallacy tricks and their strong sense of conviction, ensures that they're an absolutely infuriating person to argue with.

The Attorney's opponents will feel like they're arguing with a brick wall, and by the end, it'll be clear that nothing they could have said -- nothing whatsoever -- would have made the Attorney say, "Hmm that's a good point. I need to think about that. Maybe I'm wrong."

The result of thinking like an Attorney is that your brain's incredible ability to learn new things is mostly shut down. Even worse, your determination to confirm your existing beliefs leaves you confident about a bunch of things that aren't true.

Zealot. This is the bottom rung of the thinking ladder. "Zealot" often has a religious connotation, for good reason. Some of the most dangerous Zealots have been religious fanatics. But zealotry comes in other forms, such as political. 

Urban says about thinking like a Zealot:

Imagine you've just had your first baby. Super exciting, right? And every day when you look at your baby, you can't believe how cute it is.

This is the relationship Zealots have with their sacred ideas: the ideas aren't rugged experiments to be kicked around, they're fragile, precious babies to be adored and protected.

Just like no parent has to research whether their baby is lovable, the Zealot doesn't have to go from A to B to know their viewpoints are correct -- they just know they are. With 100 percent conviction. 

Likewise with skepticism. If someone told you your actual baby was super cute, you wouldn't assess their credibility, you'd be in automatic full agreement. And if someone told you your baby was an asshole, you wouldn't consider their opinion, you'd just think they were a terrible person.

That's why the Zealot's flip-flop goes from one extreme to the other, with no in-between. When a Zealot hears confirmation, It's obviously true. When a Zealot hears dissent, It's obviously not true. 

When Zealots argue, things can quickly get heated, because for someone who identifies with their ideas, a challenge to those ideas feels like an insult. It feels personally invalidating. A punch landed on a Zealot's idea is a punch landed on their baby. 

When the Primitive Mind is overactive in our heads, it turns us into crazy people. On top of making us think our ideas are babies, it shows us a distorted view of ourselves.

It's easier to see when other people are acting like a Sports Fan, Attorney, or Zealot than when we ourselves are. But with some introspection and being open to how other pe0ple see us, we can spend more time as a Scientist whose focus is centered strongly on truth, and less time on the lower rungs of the thinking ladder.

The way I see it, and I believe Tim Urban has the same viewpoint, we're all prone to thinking like a Scientist, Sports Fan, Attorney, and Zealot at different times and in different circumstances. However, it also seems to be true that each of us has a dominant style of thinking, and it can be difficult for us to recognize when we're not seeking truth, but confirmation of a cherished belief that could be wrong.

Comments

[um]

all scientists, sport fans and lawyers ????

Things are what they are,
seldom what they look like
let alone how they are made seen .[the scientist, sport fan, attorney and zealot|

[selective outrage]

[Jim Sutherland]

@um,….as my Detective mind keeps wondering about who some of the pseudo Avatars used here in Hine’s Church are, keeps me wondering why people keep hiding their true names, I occasionally have another premonition of who some of them might be, or if I ever have encountered them in the past, while they were using other pseudo Avatars.

So, YOU just showed up in my Radar memory screen, as haven been exposed to your writing style in the past. True, it has changed some what, but by age, not by core beliefs.

So, Um,….taking my best guess of who you posted as, in the past , is, I now believe that

Um is the reincarnation of Hoormji.

So, have I missed the Target, or struck the Bull’s Eye?

Come on um, fess up.

Jim Sutherland

[um]

@ Jim S.

>>..... keeps me wondering why people keep hiding their true name<<

And I kewep womndering that these things are so important for YOU at your age.

[Jim Sutherland]

@um,…it must be because either I getting sharper, or senile. You decide.

Those who post under pseudonyms either don’t really believe the comments they share, or they are hiding some thing they don’t any one to find out about them selves
.
So, as an Ex Preacher, called and Ordained by my Peers to Minister to all types of people, who wandered in to my Services, ….I can assure you. NONE of them attended any of my Services in order to share any thing they had that they wanted to offer, or to give me! Every last one of them Needed some thing, and hoped I had what they needed!

Sorry, but mostly all of them never received what they needed from me, except more conviction that they needed to quit hiding behind false pretenses, and just remove their masks and be proud of who they were, instead of running away from them selves.

I guess I just am still looking for what’s under the masks of those who attend Hine’s Church looking for some thing they have yet to find else where, they will find here.

What are you still looking for um/hoormji?

Confirmation of being the best Psychologist of Hine’s Church, or ?

Come on, hoormji, fess up. You were OK as you were.😇😍

Jim Sutherland

[um]

@ Jim S.

>>What are you still looking for um/hoormji?<<

If I know I will let you know.

What is it that they thought you had to give?
What do you think I can possibly need that you have?

Writing this,, a memory of the late MCS pops up:
"priests and psychiatrists have NOTHING to share of themselves with you.

[um]

@ Jim S.

>> Every last one of them Needed some thing, and hoped I had what they needed!<<

Well let me put another generalization aside yours.
Most people that as help from priests, ministers, psychiatrists and gurus are after justification of their way of life. ...

[um]

@ Jim S.

It is a well known strategy that the best way to hide something,
is to put it "on the table"
for everybody to see!

[Jim Sutherland]

@um,….well, considering that a well know Professor of our Peers once accussed you of hating yourself, which was 20 years ago, I am hoping if it was accurate then,…you have healed your self from such hatred by now.

We all have failed Brother, in our own eyes. But we know what we have failed at, not what of being accused of, by strangers who don’t know us. Actually, no one really knows us, except our wives.

So, your secret history is safe.

Jim Sutherland

[um]

@ Jim S.

>> ... considering that a well know Professor of our Peers <<

2004 ..that is quite some time ago.

I have never, as far as i can remember used, the words self hatred .

In order to fail one must have a clear goal in live and and idea of how to reach there. I never had so how could I fail?

Nobody ever knows another person. Not even one's wife.. What we know about ourselves are justy memories of how we acted or reacted in a given situation but that tells nothing about who or what we are.

[Jim Sutherland]

@um,……well, seeing you do not deny my detective work of remembering you, I will no longer put you under any further pressure of interrogation. I don’t remember of us ever corresponding, but I do remember well of you being attacked by the regular pack of Jackals and hyenas who always attacked all other intruders who were not members of their inner circle Club. I have a long memory. I forgive, but I never forget. They also never tired of attacking the late Michael Martin and me there.
Peace,
Jim Sutherland

[sant64]

These categories aren't mutually exclusive. There are plenty of scientists who are zealots.

Last post I gave the example of Scientific American. I've read many of the SA of the last 2 years. Most of the pieces are about...take a guess.

Climate Change and Covid. Covid and Climate Change.

Scientific American sees the flu and climate change as the major issues of today. Every issue of SA features articles on covid, climate change. Wake up America! Covid and Climate Change!

The problem is that we can't do anything to change the climate. Nothing practical anyway. Nevertheless, SA and similar science magazines keep up the drumbeat.

Covid? What a hoax that was. "We must prepare for the next pandemic" shouts the scientists.

Like Fauci, Grand Poobah of Science. Dr. Fauci in the 90s was telling the world that there would be an AIDS epidemic for heterosexuals. "We have to stop shaking hands." It's a dreadful fact that Fauci actually got away with his nonsense about AiDS and the need to wear masks, and worst of all, helped popularize the lame fist bump that's become a cultural norm.

Anyway, back ot Scientific American. Aside from its political bias for climate change and covid, have you noticed it covers only impractical issues? That too is a feature of the Zealot Scientist Mind.

Here's a scientific fact I recently learned: 30 years ago, the average weight of an average man was 160 lbs. Today, the average weight is 200 lbs. More science trivia you'll never see in the Science Zealot magazines: Today's children have horrible health, including fatty liver disease that we used to only see in alcoholics. Obesity is running wild and is the real epidemic facing the nation. But the Science Zealots would rather focus on unsolvable issues such as climate change, advocating a total revolution like the one that's ruined Canada. and the sky is falling hysteria over viruses that were 1000x less deadly than we were led to believe. That is zealotry. It's as harmful in the world of science as it is in religion.

[Ron E.]

Sports Fan, Attorney, Zealot and motivated reasoning – motivated reasoning being the use of reason to justify a pre-existing belief or motive. It's a natural human tendency that can occur consciously or unconsciously and seems to infiltrate much of our lives.

Sports Fan: - Not having much interest in sports, I can’t say whether motivated reasoning plays a big part, although I have heard fans make many excuses for why their team lost. And if this relates to successive losses then it seems to me that fans may blame the manage. And where money is an issue, the directors replace the manager.

Attorneys: - Surely, they have motivated reasons. One would like to think it was for truth and justice, but I suspect that it’s probably got a lot to do with prestige and money.

Zealot: - Generally, a person who has very strong opinions about something, and tries to make other people have them too. And yes, the most obvious of zealot types are to be found in religion and politics – and I would add, nationalism.

I don’t think I could add scientist to the zealot list (or to the sports fan or attorney) as I feel that it is only science, in whatever form it takes, to be the more honest and authentic in its undertakings. Not that science is always right, but it is the best method we have in addressing our human needs and inquisitiveness – which to me, includes self-enquiry.

All three of Urban’s categorizations I think, can display motivated reasoning and I would ask myself how this finds prominence in the human brain and whether it is innate or acquired. I guess the answer would embrace both seeing as though we are born with the drive to seek security on a physical level and as humans, also seeking security psychologically. Hence all our leanings toward any of the multitude of belief systems with their proffered assurances that generally help to keep us from self-questioning.

---

Brian, just to say, as this year ends - thanks and that I appreciate your blogs, mainly for the reason that the varied content gets me writing and thinking (I'm very lazy). The subjects you write on often reflect – what I see as – real life issues.

[sant64]

How do people think? Old saying comes to mind:

"Every man is a mystery to himself. But he's not a mystery to everyone who knows him, because they know him by his actions."

In these times we see lots of people who hold views that are intellectually and morally baffling to us. Even more confounding are the people with whom we wholeheartedly agree 99% of the time. But that 1% where we disagree! Are they nuts, or am i?

For example, Clay and Buck on the radio. I agree with them 99% of the time. But then they start talking about Israel and I want to vomit. Same with reading the WSJ, only worse. Every day that paper accuses anyone who criticizes what Israel is doing to the Palestinians as an "Israel hater" and an anti-Semite. And always without the tiniest scintilla of nuance or allowance for the concerns of the other side. Same morally polarized jingoistic neocon view concerning Ukraine. The WSJ believes that war is good for children and all living things. I don't. But otherwise, I tend to agree with this paper's views on the entire rest of the slate of issues facing the world.

How can this be? The minds of the people I agree with are the same minds, the same people, that come up with ideas I vehemently oppose. What does that say about how people think? When I discover that I don't fully agree with anyone, how confident I can be about my moral evaluations?

[Willam j]

@ sant64
quote;
“How can this be? The minds of the people I agree with are the same minds, the same people, that come up with ideas I vehemently oppose. What does that say about how people think? When I discover that I don't fully agree with anyone, how confident I can be about my moral evaluations?”

True that!
Regards

[umami]

Very insightful of Tim Urban to recognize that zealots take everything personally. In my observation they also make everything personal and are quick to demean, insult or demonize.

[Trez]

A clear mind sees a foggy world
A foggy mind sees a clear world

A good concept to have when being in a delusional world and with the likes of Gurinder Singh Dhilion and Radha Soami who are out to delude all.

The lies are hard to decipher but with facts and research the truth isn't far behind, try and see this ugliness that this religion yes religion tells us and look at the facts which are all contradicting.

This requires strength and courage from within as the Devil deludes all that he is and all in it
Thus hell we call the world is his playground and his cronies are here to keep it this way.

Stay clear from Gurinder Singh Dhilion and his cult

Clear the foggy mind and see the clear world

[Appreciative Reader]

Enjoyed this post, as well!

I’d thought, basis your last post, Brian, that this was a binary kind of schema. Like that Scout thing you’d discussed some months/years back. Turns out it’s more detailed, more like the Transactional Analysis thing.

----------

One observation, basis some of the comments here and in the last thread as well: We probably shouldn’t expect actual people manning these professions to necessarily answer to these specific categories. And nor should we, probably, extrapolate too much on what these categories might indicate, basis actual scientists and sports enthusiasts and attorneys we know. (Except, I guess, for the Zealot category. That may well apply directly and fully, because that kind of closed-mindedness is actually what zealotry, in regular parlance, refers to --- unlike the names given to the other categories.)

What I mean is: It is perfectly possible for a professional scientist, even a good scientist, to not be a Scientist --- capital S --- in matters other than their actual work in the narrow work within their specific field. In fact, that often does happen. Likewise, it’s perfectly possible for an attorney to not be blinkered as the Capital-A Attorney would be, but instead be clear-headed but deliberately disingenuous in the interests of their profession. That happens, as well. Which last is not a nice thing at all, the clear-headed-but-deliberately-disingenuous-attorney thing, and I’m not saying I approve, on the contrary: but, I’m saying, the category’s just a general name, and need not indicate that actual scientists, attorneys and sports fans will necessarily answer to those specifics. (Well, Zealot excepted, possibly --- like I said.)

And similarly, we probably should not go on extrapolating the qualities of these categories beyond the descriptions Urban’s provided here, basis the professionals we ourselves know --- just like it would probably be misplaced to extrapolate on TA’s Parent and Child and Adult categories basis actual parents and children and adults we know and are (or have been).

…But cool schema. I particularly enjoyed the Scientist thing in the last post, as a detailed description of the kind of thinking that each one of us can aspire to and should try to adhere to.

----------

Happy Christmas, Brian! And Happy Christmas, gang!

(A little bit in advance, because I’m going away for a holiday, and will try to --- hopefully! --- refrain from compulsively logging in here and commenting while away.)

[Karim W. Rahmaan]

@Trez
To the only one name truth telling. Why the need for the Buddhist Tengu Mask?

I remembered your last post of clear 'truth':

"Gurinder has been exposed and caught..
...
..Finally he has run away from the fake persoudo and taken early retirement as he knows soon he's going to be caught out outright by the sangat too.." [SIC]

Posted below:

https://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2024/12/the-rssb-guru-appears-to-be-teaching-advaita.html?cid=6a00d83451c0aa69e202c8d3c6be14200c#comment-6a00d83451c0aa69e202c8d3c6be14200c

Early retirement eh? I think truthfully, Baba Ji IS well over retirement age.🤔

So you spew LIES.

Which reminds of the Teachings from Sawan Singh, Sardar Bahadur Jagat Singh, Charan, to present.

Do you even know what Satsang means? It is not just a gathering. Satsang; sat meaning Truth,and sang, In The Company Of. So the Sangat gathers to further the gathering of Truth. Maharaj Ji called it the Fence in which the flowers of the garden stay watered.

But there was another lesson on Satsang. It dealt with the weeds which can strangle out the flowers. Agents of Kal, who are against our objective to cultivating Truth. And that contact or association with those Agents of Kal, will eventually bring assimilation, cutting off the divine waters of Satsang.

This was the harsh lesson I hold more dear, that Charan"s version. As it is CLEAR here by your deliberate lies you are against even simple truth and clarity.