How should you think about thinking? According to cognition expert Julia Galef, people often make a decision before getting all the relevant facts, and then defend their choice against anything that does not support it. The result, all too often, she writes, is poor, sometimes disastrous, decision-making. Intel’s history serves as a stark example of the advantages of what Galef calls the “Scout” mind-set, while France’s disastrous Dreyfus affair exemplifies the pitfalls of a “Soldier” approach.
The “Scout” mind-set accepts the facts instead of engaging in wishful thinking.
The resolution of the Dreyfus affair exemplifies the “Scout” mind-set in action: In 1894, the French army discovered someone was selling military secrets to Germany. Investigators suspected Alfred Dreyfus. His rank gave him access to the secrets, and he was unpopular among his fellow officers because he was the only Jew on staff.
Investigators submitted handwriting samples to two experts, one of whom confirmed that the writing matched Dreyfus’s; the other did not. The investigators discounted the skeptical expert because he worked for the Bank of France; Jews were powerful in finance and the investigators thought this swayed his judgment. Dreyfus protested his innocence, but faced a guilty verdict for treason and a life sentence on Devil’s Island.
Shortly after Dreyfus went to Devil’s Island, Colonel Georges Picquart became the French chief of counterespionage, with an assignment to gather additional evidence against Dreyfus. Picquart disliked Dreyfus and believed him guilty. But when new letters to the Germans surfaced, Picquart noticed...
Comment on this summary or Diskussion beginnen