We have carried our Stone Age brain into the Internet Age.
Pg. 242
The name says it all, the HIDDEN Brain.
We think we operate as conscious rational actors who make evidence based decision. Except we don't, because much, if not most, of our brain/mind operates out of sight ( and "out of mind" you might say). And aside from automatic survival functions the brain handles, it also filter our thoughts and actions through biases we don't see and often are consciously against the biased viewpoint.
[in the stock market] they found that companies with easy to pronounce names out performed companies with hard to pronounce name by 11.2 percent on their first day of trading...after six months it was more than 27 percent. After a year, it was more than 33 percent. Pg. 29
Their hidden brains associated the names of companies that were associated companies that easy to pronounce with a sense of comfort...comfort linked to familiarity and safety which is why investors chose some stocks and drove up the prices. Pg.30
We all walk around thinking we are thinking for ourselves...but we ain't.
Our society resolutely believes the conscious mind is all that matters, and so all our educational and legal efforts focus on that. Pg. 75
And some people use that almost universal fiction for devious ends. Nowadays republican politics has turned into code words and dog whistles and gaslight-ing so people like Trump can say a dozen different things but as long as he doesn't explicitly say "I never specifically said to storm congress and attack them... so you can't touch me!" [ my imaginary trump quote, so technically I should have left off the quotes I guess ].
Aside from our hidden biases he goes into general unthinking human behavior like how when in a crisis a group people will slow down and look for consensus rather then individuals assert dominance. Like on 9/11 in the south tower before it was hit but after the first plane hit the north tower, why did almost everybody on floor 88 in get out while on floor 89 almost nobody got out? The same company and the same type of employees on both floors, BUT on floor 88 ONE GUY immediately jumped up and ran through the floor shouting that everybody needed to exit the building ( this guy ran upstairs to get other moving and in the process missed his time to get out ).
He also goes into what motivates suicide bombers, and it isn't' really religion but rather community and finding meaning with peers.
The central insight of all this research is that suicide terrorism is only a special case of a larger phenomenon. The hidden brain’s drive for approval and meaning, and the ability of small groups to confer such approval and meaning, is what is common to the world of the elite corporate executive and the young marine, the terrorist organization and the missionary order that sends idealistic people into harm’s way. pg. 154
He also speculates on why people will be moved to give large amounts of money to save one child, or even one dog, but never spend less to end up saving many more children or animals through support of aid organizations. He attributes it to people not being able to relate to large numbers or groups.
I believe our inability to wrap our minds around large number sis responsible for out apathy toward mass suffering. Pg. 249
We spend our money to save one life and not ten lives or a hundred, because our internal telescope unconsciously biases us to care more about one life than a hundred Pg. 251
Since we are both really just playing armchair sociologists I contend it is that people are really motivated by stories, stories they can relate to, and it is easy to appreciate single child or animal but with multitudes it becomes statistics. Deadly and depressing statistics for sure, but we just don't connected to that information as a story we "relate" to, even if we wish things were better for all those people and animals.
In the end he goes on about how to address convincing people to somehow change or drop their biases and he basically says you have to address it only obliquely, not head on. Well maybe, I mean confronting directly doesn't help so I guess it is better than just giving up, even it if probably won't work
It was an old lesson from therapy textbooks: Regardless of whether feeling are justified, they were real. You cannot eliminate feelings by denying their validity; indeed, denying them usually strengthened them. Pg. 224
Good stuff. Lots of things to keep in mind, and to have a reference to look at again. BUT somehow I feel he left something out, but I am just not smart enough to say exactly what it was. Just that I was wanting something more, something just a little bit deeper.
Maybe it is up to me to take the next step. Up to me to find that bit that is a little deeper. Use this book to wake myself up so I notice my own biases and don’t sleepwalk through my encounters with other in the world. OK, OK, I will try harder!!