We can learn from tragedies - even preventable ones. It's important to remember though about hindsight bias, and the "nirvana fallacy." Let's talk about this a little bit.
Minithread time:
/1
Minithread time:
/1
Hindsight bias is forgetting the position we were at in the beginning of a decision; we have knowledge that came over time, but at the time we had less knowledge.
"You shouldn't have let your child the house," a police officer reprimands a parent after an accident occurs.
/2
"You shouldn't have let your child the house," a police officer reprimands a parent after an accident occurs.
/2
Of course, the knowledge of the accident is where that advice comes from, not the knowledge prior to the accident. Parents let their children leave the house for a whole host of reasons, and sometimes parents THINK they are restricting it but the child leaves anyway.
/3
/3
Today. what we know about COVID is now *prior* knowledge for a new wave/variant. Our advice about vaccination, restriction, non-medical interventions, is the *best knowledge we have now.* If we find out something new, it is NOT fair to use hindsight bias against "science."
/4
/4
People make mistakes and misjudgments all the time. The true ERROR occurs when prior knowledge exists that was discarded, missed, or ignored. For example, the 90th time Gandhi or Makary says that "COVID is over" is wrong 90x, even if they eventually gets it right.
/5
/5
The second bias/fallacy i see a lot is the "nirvana fallacy," where an ideal is espoused that is not tenable. It's very easily seen when someone suggests, in politics, that americans who oppose party x should vote for a third party candidate.
/6
/6
A multiparty system would help the polarization of American politics, but pretending like voting for Jill Stein will beat Donald Trump is just not realistic. Change needs to occur, but not at the needless gesture of throwing away a vote (if one values stopping Trump).
/7
/7
In COVID times, i see a lot of "impractical advocacy" that succumbs to the Nirvana fallacy.
"during lockdowns, we should be protecting our workers by providing wage protection and maybe NOT ordering from Uber."
/8
"during lockdowns, we should be protecting our workers by providing wage protection and maybe NOT ordering from Uber."
/8
Of course, it's fine advocacy & it is helpful to remember that the marginalized and underprivileged bear the worst of the pandemic.
But, for example, in America, there was a political fight for months over $1200.
Sure, UBI might help during lockdown but ITS NOT HAPPENING.
/9
But, for example, in America, there was a political fight for months over $1200.
Sure, UBI might help during lockdown but ITS NOT HAPPENING.
/9
Ideally, those that have wouldn't need to shop and be served by those who need the work to survive. But practically, shutting down what we can and vaccinated and *minimizing* exposure risk to those who still work is at the very least tenable.
/10
/10
Sorry, super-idealistic holier-than-thou tweeter, your strategy of a worldwide equitable prevention strategy with wage protections and income protection for every marginalized and homeless person is as useful as the college-age suggestion "we shouldn't have war, man."
/11
/11
When thinking about covid, take a moment to ask yourself a few things:
1) am i succumbing to *hindsight* bias in my thinking (would i still feel the same way BEFORE i knew what i now know)
2) am i offering or thinking about anything realistic?
/12
1) am i succumbing to *hindsight* bias in my thinking (would i still feel the same way BEFORE i knew what i now know)
2) am i offering or thinking about anything realistic?
/12
If not, then maybe chill with the righteous anger.
Lots to criticize WITHOUT either bias or fallacy.
Lots to criticize WITHOUT either bias or fallacy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
