We see things, not as they are, but as we are....

[qijackie]

This article is a fairly mild one that points out how we all perceive and process exactly the same information quite differently in order to support our existing position on a matter. I think it is worth reading in its entirety. I suspect a study of DU posts in this forum would back up the theory all the way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/opinion/17kristof.html?ref=opinion

Excerpts:
Divided They Fall By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: April 17, 2008

If you’re a Democrat, your candidate won in Wednesday night’s presidential debate — that was obvious, and most neutral observers would recognize that. But the other candidate issued appalling distortions, and the news commentary afterward was shamefully biased. So you’re madder than ever at the other candidate. You may even be more likely to vote for John McCain if your candidate loses.

snip...

To understand your feelings about Wednesday night’s debate, consider the Dartmouth-Princeton football game in 1951. That bitterly fought contest was the subject of a landmark study about how our biases shape our understanding of reality.

Psychologists showed a film clip of the football game to groups of students at each college and asked them to act as unbiased referees and note every instance of cheating. The results were striking. Each group, watching the same clip, was convinced that the other side had cheated worse — and this was not deliberate bias or just for show.

“Their eyes were taking in the same game, but their brains seemed to be processing the events in two distinct ways,” Farhad Manjoo writes in his terrific new book, “True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society.” It’s the best political book so far this year.

snip... the article continues with more examples and info -

[A-Schwarzenegger]

1. We see things as they would had been, not as we could been being.

:radio:

[calmblueocean]

2. That column has a nice ending. Still, I don't think this is a case where both sides are equal.

Hillary is campaigning like a Republican.

She uses typical Republican attacks against Democrats -- too liberal, out of touch, elitist, not tough enough, etc. -- and frankly, any Democrat worth their salt should find that odious. This race right now is Hillary and McCain vs. Obama, when it should be Hillary and Obama vs. McCain.

Note that this is all noncontroversial. I could go back to Bush's campaign against John Kerry, or Bush Sr.'s campaign against Dukakis, and pull out the same sort of attacks. Sometimes people are biased for substantial reasons.

[bain_sidhe]

6. Heh. Great illustration! n/t

[grasswire]

3. a "Post-Fact" society. Hmmmmm.

Is that the equivalent of the WH statement about them making their own reality and the rest of us just being observers? I guess so. Brave new world. Ugh.

[Oilwellian]

4. Your post reminded me...

of this quote that's always given me pause:

"What you see in others, is a reflection of yourself."

[stillcool]

11. I like that one...

..and 'what you don't see isn't real'.

[TheDoorbellRang]

5. There's much truth in this. We've become so polarized here

But the thing is, I do think we see our candidate's shortcomings, but it doesn't help our cause to speculate on them during these days of heedless finger pointing.

I will say that, despise whatever shortcomings I've noted in Obama, one of his strengths is his willingness to listen to many points of view. It gives me a lot of comfort to know that when he is president we can send letters of dissent to the office of president and assume our opinion will be heard, rather than wondering if we are now on some sort of enemy list.

[NorthCarolina]

7. Good point, but there's no denying that there is plenty of subterfuge in America's elections

of late.

[IsItJustMe]

8. I support Obama and I think he lost the debate. The reason he lost the debate, for the most part,

is that he had to spend a 4 to 1 ratio of his time defending himself. Am I wrong?

[qijackie]

9. I don't know.......

are you right? are you wrong?

I tend to think that we live in our own "bubbles" and filter the input/output as best we can to support our views of ourselves.

When I read many of the posts here, I keep thinking of the Shias and the Sunnis, of the Catholics and the Protestests, of the Hatfields and McCoys, the American colonies and the British monarchy, the Yankees and the Rebels, the French and the English Canadians, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera..... you know, of all the endless fighting that has gone on for centuries (whether in the name of religion, or politics, or economics, or whatever) on this planet .... and each side truly believes they are right. They truly believe they are right!! That belief takes people to the place where they are not just willing to die for their beliefs but kill for them.

So once I controlled my own urge to jump into the fray here and announce my own "rightness" continually, I realized that the posters here aren't "evil" .... it is just that each truly believes they are right. Kind of mind-boggling and sobering for me.

[IsItJustMe]

10. There is no doubt that we create our subjective reality through the filters that we have already

created through our life experiences. That does not mean; however, that we can not detatch ourselves, in other words, step outside our own box, far enough to see a more objective reality.

I am neither attached to Obama or Clinton. I will vote for Obama because he seems to the best out of the three candidates. I was an Edwards supporter. I voted for him in my state, even though he had already quit the race. The reason I still voted for him was because I had no real feeling for either Clinton or Obama.

With that being said, I took a hard turn against Clinton when she made her statement that McCain had the experience to be CIC and that Obama didn't.

I must have some filters in my own life with issues dealing with loyalty.

Even though I believe I see things a little more cleary, because of my non attatchment, to either candidate, even there I must admit that I could be wrong.

LOL

I hope that helps.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Considering that Obama was put in a lose/lose situation to begin with....

So the question is not whether he lost, but who else lost?
I believe that the media lost, that Hillary lost, Pennsylvania Voters lost, and the American people lost. So Obama is not alone in his loss, and out of all of them, he lost by the least.

[qijackie]

15. your thoughtful reply

Thanks for it. My first thought was...... I didn't hear/see/process (whatever) what Clinton said about McCain as supporting McCain - I took it as what one fighter in the ring might say about an opponent - that McCain is a worthy opponent (but on opposite sides just the same). Nor did I hear/see/process anything that indicated that Clinton said Obama is not a worthy opponent...she just left him out of that statement at the time for whatever reason. But I also thought that "praising" McCain wasn't going to make Obama supporters happy so I also wondered why she felt it necessary to do that.

Then...my next thought on your post is that I do believe we can detach ourselves and that we actually often try to do so.... but I think we don't detach far enough. That is, we try to see a bigger picture by moving a step back but if we moved another step back the picture would grow, and if we moved another step back... and so on.... until we are really looking at a seriously big picture. Its like seeing a tan color that fills our visual field completely and is overwhelming..... then wondering what it is... maybe step back and it turns out to be something that is tan... step back and it turns out to be a boulder... step back and it is a rock in a field.... and so on. Sort of trying for multiple perspectives. Its an interesting exercise anyway.

[IsItJustMe]

16. We seem to think along the same lines. If I may suggest, I just know you would love a book that I

have been reading.

Quantum Consciousness (Stephen Wolinsky)

It's basically a book comparing Quantum Physics with the way that we view reality.

[qijackie]

17. sorry for answer delays ... I get many interruptions -

Thanks for the suggestion. I've requested my local library to find it for me. Might take awhile. But in searching for it, I found that B. Alan Wallace had a book out in 2007 that I really want to read so I reserved that one -
Hidden dimensions : the unification of physics and consciousness / 2007
Wallace, B. Alan.

For me, personally, I have found a great deal of sense in Buddhist philosophy over the years. Not that I am very good at putting it into practice in my daily life - but I find that it does offer a view that I aspire to attain...even if only after many eons!

[stillcool]

12. Sometimes losing is winning..

he did not have to say word one, and ABC got an earful. If not a win for him, it was certainly a win for 'us'.

[IsItJustMe]

13. I think you are right. Short term, he may have lost that one. Long term, he may very well have won

it.