There has been talk over the past few weeks of opinion bubbles. I have decided (by myself) to weigh (not in the way you imagine, though I am going to whine a lot, a whole lot) in on the subject because I noticed a good percentage of articles and opinions I consumed came from foreign internationals in the wake of Trump’s surprising win.
I wondered what I could learn and how I could extract chilling insights for myself, a young Nigerian, who inhabits an infinitesimal space in some obscure part of the internet. So I wrote this for those who like me, wonder what the hell everybody is talking about when they talk about opinion bubbles.
But first a somewhat sci-ency analogical foundation
A quick google search defines a bubble as —
1. A thin air of gas enclosing air and another gas.
2. Used to refer to a good or fortunate situation that is isolated from reality and unlikely to last.
Now we know bubbles are enclosed gaseous spaces isolated from other gaseous spaces via a thin film. Here we could also say the thin film characteristic of bubbles is (almost) always transparent or at least translucent to viewers both outside and inside the bubble. If I extend this property to a bubble of opinions and worldviews, this means we don’t have to presume that those inside a bubble do not see opposing views at all. A different reality exists outside the bubble, it is just not acknowledged for a myriad of reasons.
I think the most important feature of bubbles that pertains to this discussion, is a balance between being relatively stable and bursting at the prick of say a pin.
How do we even form opinions and world views?
People form biases and systems of thought through long arduous processes of incorporating new information and aligning it with previous prejudices. These complicated assumptions form the basis of a worldview, one that shapes how we interact with the world. In truth these views are not completely static, they cannot be, the system itself is not coherent, we mix and match whatever we like, eventually building islands surrounded by a sea of cognitive dissonance.
We interpret new information through the lens of the old.
It all doesn’t have to make sense, just convenient, and oh do we sometimes go through such great lengths to keep it as such. Right from cradle, we are proselytised, hypnotised by values that shape our general outlook. This interacts(interferes) with how we explore the unknown.
We evolved to survive in a world that no longer exists.
We do not have the capability to instantly grasp the complexities of probability, mathematics, statistics etc. This why we spend years going to school and getting educated. What we do possess though, are heuristics that help simplify complex reality, we evolved these mechanisms to cope with the world. For example we know how to gauge danger via body language cues from animals and fellow humans alike. This means we can often and to a reasonable degree of practicality, instinctively tell friend from foe and assess potentially dangerous situations, a valuable asset for surviving in the wild — A world that no longer exists (for most of us anyway).
Our evolutionary biology evolved mechanisms to minimise disaster, not aim for the bulls eye.
Biases arise by a couple of processes
Information processing shortcuts (heuristics): These are hacks, hard-coded by virtue of our long evolutionary history. They provide practical and commonsense solutions to real world problems that do not have to be optimal or accurate. We use pattern recognition and intuition to greatly reduce the time required to come to a decision, and this is especially pronounced when we deal with information overload.
Noisy information processes: This comes from distortions in how we internalise information and perceive events. Sometimes we might ignore parts of the input required to reach a right conclusion and erroneously promote irrelevancies. It also has to do with memory storage and recollection. How accurate is your memory? When you recollect memories, are you remembering exactly what happened or an iteration of events dependent on your mood at the time, your mood at the present and your brain’s storage capabilities?
The brain’s information processing limitations: Yes people say the brain is the most powerful computer on the planet at the moment, capable of 10¹⁶ processes per second. But the brain is still subject to major limitations. For example,look at this quick math question: What is 124 multiplied by 326 in base 7? Pretty sure that would take you a while to compute. Yes the brain is powerful computation wise, but a large chunk of this power is directed to subconscious processes.
Emotional and moral inclinations: Emotions and standards of morality play a noticeable role in how we process information and reach conclusions. Heightened emotions can sometimes cloud judgement, and make objective analysis of all variables to be considered in reaching a suitable decision that much harder. Think all the times you were angry and said horrible things you couldn’t take back.
Social Influences: We are social animals born into various societies, each with its own code of ethics and unwritten rules. These rules more often than not colour how we might perhaps approach issues.
Stumbling blocks in the way of breaking through biases
Unknown unknowns: The more you read and discover about the world around you, ideally the more you’re supposed to find out just how much you do not know. This wicked irony happens while you’re expanding your knowledge base. The problem with unknown unknowns is you do not know that you do not know what you do not know. The democratisation of knowledge in the internet age means we often conflate ubiquity with access.
The Fact that Biases exist at all and the illusion of knowledge: We have a tendency to demonise biases. On the evolutionary scale, they helped our progenitors cut decision making time in antiquity, but now we’re stuck with them. We simplify the world through intuition which is crafted based on a reserve of knowledge and past experiences that don’t necessarily have to be ours. This, coupled with a long history of pattern recognition gives us confidence in our choices and opinions. We are all unwitting pragmatists. We depend largely on the past and this may result in complacency. Which then leads us to assume implied truisms to be true without much inspection or prodding. If a system has always worked, why should I change it?
Fear: What if you woke up tomorrow to find that all you know is false? How would you take it? For most of us there are fundamental ideals from which our ideas of self and consequent projections about the world must flow. We sometimes, have our identities so tightly intertwined with these assumptions that at any attempt to prod, our whole world comes crashing down. Conformation bias is a mechanism by which we avoid this mental strain. We actively seek cohesion, so we go through great lengths to avoid encountering information that puts a strain on the validity of our beliefs and prejudices. This is how the mind protects itself.
And lastly we don’t really give a fuck.
Bubbles form when we inhabit (ideological, political, academic etc) spaces that continually reaffirm previous biases and knowledge a priori.
A priori judgements in this context are liberated from the burden of proof. They are assumed to be self evident truths like those stated in America’s declaration of independence.
So we need to ask ourselves, are our positions on issues really as reasoned out as they ought to be? Or do we inhabit echo chambers that confirm these biases and invalidate every other angle by implication.
