Most of us will use the same tools we’ve always used and think the same way we’ve always thought unless we are deliberately trying to step out of the rut. This is because these methods we already know use the least computing power or brain power, even though they are often less accurate.
This may be true of emotional intelligence and other varied intelligences as well, but today’s focus is on cognitive intelligence and whether being considered intelligent really means you are capable of acting logically and rationally.
The tendency is prevalent enough that it is studied in regards to improving IQ tests and defining what intellgence actually means. Here are a few sample questions you can ask yourself.
Do you lack specific tools to act rationally?
For example, certain questions require specialized knowledge, such as calculating probabilities and comparing a small chance in a large population to a large chance in a small population. If you’ve never been taught this bit of math, then you’re lacking a tool.
For example, if you are told that Harry is an introvert and then asked if it’s more likely that he’s a librarian or a salesman, then most people will pick librarian because the characteristic goes with the stereotype for the occupation. However, any particular person is a 100 times more likely to be salesman, simply because there are so many more of them.
Are you influenced by the my-side bias?
Most of us have a subconscious preference for those people, stories, or solutions that we identify with in some form or fashion. When tests are run regarding split-second decisions the groups that the individual considers to be on their side are favored. These “my side” decisions can be obvious or subtle, but they do exist.
Do you only focus on confirming and not falsifying?
Most of us will only try to confirm an idea. We won’t go out and create the test that would prove something is false instead. This tendency can trip us up with puzzles and in real life situations, even when using standard analytical techniques like the scientific method.
For more try this:
If the above ideas interest you, then you can buy a digital issue of Scientific American Mind and read the full article that inspired this post or go the even more in-depth route and read Keith Stanovich’s book on What Intelligence Tests Miss: the Psychology of Rational Thought.
