Are We as Rational as we think we are?

What has surprised me most about intelligent people is the remarkably dominant role that emotion (as opposed to rational thinking) plays in the determination of their beliefs. That is, otherwise highly intelligent people, in forming social and political opinions tend to believe what they would like to believe, independent of the facts. Amid my colleagues at the university, there are some who have demonstrated high mathematical intelligence, yet in discussions of a social or political nature, their beliefs are diametrically opposed to mine. Interested in probing further into the reasons for the differences in our opinions, I have, from time to time, engaged these colleagues in conversations –civil conversations, with each of us respecting the other’s point of view and searching for the roots of our different perspectives.

What I discovered was something that psychologist Dan Kahan of Yale University is calling politically motivated reasoning. While confirmation bias prompts us to explore only those resources or media that support our opinions, politically motivated reasoning involves considering evidence contrary to our opinion, but discounting its importance when evaluating its content. Kahan asserts:*

High numeracy—a quantitative reasoning proficiency that strongly predicts the disposition to use System 2 information processing [i. e., logical analysis]—also magnifies politically motivated reasoning. In one study, subjects highest in Numeracy more accurately construed complex empirical data … only when the data, properly interpreted, supported the position congruent with their political outlooks. When the data properly interpreted was inconsistent with their predispositions, they were more disposed than low numeracy subjects to dismiss it as flawed. If this is how people use their reasoning proficiencies to assess evidence about contested facts in the real world, then we would expect to see exactly what observational studies consistently find: namely, a progressive increase in political polarization as individuals of opposing outlooks become even more proficient in critical reasoning.

In other words, politically motivated reasoning causes us to weigh more heavily the evidence that agrees with our current opinions and attribute less weight to evidence that challenges our beliefs. Furthermore, those who are most proficient in higher-order thinking tend to use their superior cognitive skills to craft better arguments to support their current opinions rather than challenge them. Seeking signs of politically motivated reasoning in myself, I began to looking inward for the origins and justifications of my own beliefs. Though this process did not necessarily change my opinion, it often modified my level of certainty about my views and made me more receptive to views contrary to mine.

Politically motivated reasoning has been flagrantly evident among those in mathematics education who have been claiming that mathematics is a tool of white supremacy–a subject that white males use to enhance their power by making minorities feel inferior. Eric Weinstein, who received his Ph.D. in mathematics at Harvard answered as follows:

Question: Is Math Racist? Why do “students of color struggle with the subject”?

Answer: Congratulations to our first place US Math Olympiad team members Vincent Huang, Colin Tang, Edward Wan, Brandon Wang, Luke Robitaille, and Daniel Zhu. Pictured below.

…Hmm. It’s fascinating how a single observation can destroy a cherished belief.

*Kahan, Dan M. Dec. 2015. “The Politically Motivated Reasoning Paradigm.” Emerging Trends in Social & Behavioral Sciences. Forthcoming, A preprint of this article is accessible at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2703011. The quote is on page 12 of the preprint.