The Flawed Decision-making Ability of Human Beings

“There is a way that people think is right, but it leads only to death.” Proverbs 14:2 (ERV)

          We have a higher opinion of our ability to make moral decisions than we should.  Actually, this relative “delusion” often extends to our ability to make logical decisions in general.  Elsewhere <here> I talked about the fact that even when we know the right thing to do, we don’t always do it.  But there is an even deeper issue that we all have, which is succinctly summarized in the Proverb above:  sometimes we think something is right - convinced of it even – but we are wrong. 

This is hard for us to accept.  We usually have a pretty good idea when other people are wrong.  We’d probably agree with the general concept that human beings are not perfect decision-makers on any topic, including moral decisions.  But when it comes to admitting that this principle applies to us – to me – well, then we get pretty defensive.  It’s easy for us to see the shortcomings in others – but when it comes to taking care of our own shortcomings, we become pretty blind.

          The point I want to make in this entry is to establish this principle:  we take a big risk when we decide to establish our own reason and feelings as the basis for determining right and wrong.  The risk is that we can be convinced that something is right, but “it leads only to death.”  In general we know the fundamentals of logic and reason.  We can think through situations and make good and correct decisions.  We have that ability.  But sometimes we just fail to make use of our innate abilities.  I’d like to make this point with three different illustrations of common human behavior.

         

          Example #1:  Our emotions and sensitivities can override our reason.  Want an obvious example of that?  Tailgating.  Driving 60 miles an hour and being 15 feet behind the car in front of you.  I’ve done quite a bit of driving in my day and I’ve driven from East coast to West coast.  And what I have observed is that at least 50% of you are chronic tailgaters.  Why is that?  There is not a shred of logic behind tailgating.  When it comes to weighing risk and benefit, it is all risk with zero benefit.  Do I really need to explain it?  But, for a variety of reasons, most people just can’t help themselves.  And it’s so easy to stop tailgating – just back off – but yet we still do it.  With tailgating, we are needlessly risking our own lives and the lives of those around us.  And I won’t even mention things like texting and driving or drunk driving.  If we can’t be trusted to use our reason properly in something so common and so simple, how can we really trust ourselves in bigger, more complex, decisions?

Example 2:  Our perspective bias – we see what we want to see.  Plenty of examples of this can be found in the world of sports.  In particular, I’m talking about fans of sports teams. People root for the sports teams of their choice and their views are totally influenced by their “fandom.”  A group of people see the same play but the fans on one side say that there was a foul and the fans on the other side say there was no foul.  Isn’t it clear that some people’s view of what did or didn’t happen is clouded by their biases as a fan?

          I’m a big Cleveland Indians fan.  As a result, I see things related to my team in a favorable light.  I still think that the Atlanta Braves pitching staff got too generous of a strike zone in the ’95 World Series.  If you’re a Braves fan, I’m sure you saw it differently (and by now you surely don’t care).  This type of disagreement occurs daily in sports.  Fans on one side say “that was obviously the worst call ever” and fans on the other side say “there is no question that was the right call.”  Well, they can’t all be right – but they are all convinced that they are right.  Totally convinced.  This just illustrates how we are so easily biased by our own situation, our own environment, our own family and friends.  This is one big reason why we can’t always trust ourselves as the final decision-maker about right and wrong.  We will often be too lenient on our friends and too harsh on our enemies (or, sometimes, vice versa!).  And, worst of all, we will almost always be too lenient on ourselves.

Example #3: We can say we believe something when we don’t really believe it.  It’s just another fact of human nature:  we can all be hypocrites sometimes.  I think it might be one of those unique qualities of human beings.  I think we all have things that, if someone asked us, we would say we believe with great confidence, yet our actions would prove otherwise.   Case in point:  “everything is relative.”  I don’t mean in “relative” as in physics, but relative in moral issues.  I know plenty of people that would deny that there are any moral absolutes.  They would argue the issue for hours – vehemently.  Yet, at the same time, they would also stand strongly on moral statements such as “it’s wrong to judge others” or “you can’t tell me what is wrong for me.”  These are absolute truths that they, in actual practice, live by.  They say “there are no absolutes”, but they live as if there are.

Of course, the moral relativists don’t have the corner on hypocrisy.  Those who stand staunchly on various moral absolutes can be the biggest hypocrites of all.  Just observe their actions!  Do they always do what they say?  It happens all the time that those who speak out against some great “sin” or other are then found to violate that very issue. 

Be honest people:  we’re all big hypocrites!

          We have to make decisions about what is right and wrong on a daily basis.  We are faced with choices – we can’t avoid that – and we have to respond, even if the way we respond is to do nothing.  All I want to conclude in this entry is that if we rely on our own great impeccable innate ability to determine what is right and wrong…well, we’re going to make some mistakes.  No – probably a lot of mistakes.  We’re just not as good at this as we think we are.