“This is
the essence of intuitive heuristics:
when faced
with a difficult question,
we often
answer an easier one instead,
usually
without noticing the substitution.”
Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow
Nicole and I look forward each year to Geneva
Library’s book sale. If you time your visit well, you can score bags of books
for just a few dollars. So, this year, when the moment came, we made our yearly
pilgrimage to the library’s basement. Arriving there, we found that the deals
abounded in the young adult section -- 25¢ a book, paperback or hardcover!
We moved in, collecting our ‘finds’ and stacking them in the corner before
returning to the table to search for more. We split up, moving quickly to beat
the other browsers to the best deals. (Picture Black Friday shopping at
Walmart, but with books rather than electronics.) Our stack grew taller.
A few minutes later, I picked up a book from
the table and studied its contents. As I did, I walked around the table past
Nicole. She was leaning over the books. I was focused on the book, but in my
peripheral vision I saw her picking through the books. As I passed her, I
reached out and gave her bottom a ‘love pat.’
I heard a surprised “Eep!” She sprang
upright. I turned.
There, standing just a few feet away from me,
was a fiftyish-year-old woman with a very red face. And she was decidedly not
my wife! I had just patted a stranger’s bottom.
Oh my. I don’t embarrass easily, but I was
really embarrassed. “I am so sorry,” I stammered, “I thought you were my
wife.” I moved away, raising my hands into the air and affecting as much
contrition as possible. “I am… so… so sorry.”
The lady was very kind and did not slug me,
and I appreciated that. She laughed it off, and I went to the far side of the
room and tried to find a corner in which to hide. Really, not a good
experience.
I’ve had a little time to think over this
experience, and I have come to the conclusion that I fell prey to the
‘familiarity heuristic.’ (I know, I know. Some of you are thinking I fell prey
to the ‘stupidity heuristic.’ Hmm, maybe so. But I do think the ‘familiarity
heuristic’ played a role.) Let me see if I can explain that.
The word ‘heuristic’ comes from a Greek word
meaning “to find.” We use a derivative of the same root word when we recount Archimedes’
exclamation of discovery, “Eureka
The advantage of heuristics is that they
permit us to process run-of-the-mill information in quick and non-intrusive
ways. Think of your daily drive to work. You’ve done it many times, so your
brain is able to put itself into a sort of ‘auto-pilot.’ You are driving the
car, but at the same time you are able to listen to the radio or think about
other things. You do not need to focus exclusively on the driving.
Many types of heuristics have been identified
by researchers. One of these is the ‘familiarity heuristic.’ This heuristic
allows someone to approach an issue or problem based on the fact that the
situation is one with which the individual is familiar, and so one should act
the same way he has acted in the same situation before.
Okay, let’s put aside the question of whether
I should be giving my wife ‘love pats.’ She would probably say no. But
let’s simply acknowledge that it is a questionable habit into which I have
fallen. When we’re out shopping or walking or doing something like that, I
often randomly walk up behind her and give her one. (Yes, at the least partly
for the joy of hearing her say, “Knock it off.”)
Looking at this from a heuristic perspective,
the situation at the book sale was one with which I was familiar. I am shopping
near my wife; I am walking by my wife; I want to annoy my wife… All
familiar territory. Then, without confirming the perceptions of my peripheral
vision, and without disengaging the auto-pilot, I act in the same manner as I
have before. I reach out and smack her butt.
And here is where I fell prey to the
familiarity heuristic. I permitted my perceived familiarity with the situation
to cloud my judgment, and I blew it. Big time. I patted the stranger’s bottom.
Now, most of you are smarter than me and are
not going to pat the stranger’s bottom. Good. But that does not mean that you
are immune from the dangers of the familiarity heuristic. We all are.
And, today, I want to suggest one area in which we must be particularly
careful to avoid being led astray by this heuristic – the interpretation of
Scripture.
It seems to me that this danger increases
with one’s reading of the Bible. The more one reads the Scriptures and knows
them (or believes himself to know them), the more he is at risk of assuming certain
things. Let me give one example from my past.
The first verse I ever memorized was John
3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” I
believe that this is the first verse many Christians memorize, and with good
reason. It does sum up the Gospel, doesn’t it?
But the word in this verse I want to look at
is the word “whosoever.” This word, from the King James Version,
communicated to me (rightly or wrongly) a certain openness concerning the
invitation. Anyone could believe. And I accepted that and absorbed it
into my younger theology, believing I had a ‘proof text’ for that belief.
Many years later, I had the opportunity to
translate that passage for myself. And I was shocked. The ‘so’ of ‘whosoever’
was not there. It never had been. The text reads, literally, “…that every
one who is believing on Him might not perish but might have life eternal…” a
reality that is reflected in the modern translations, including the New King
James, which translates the text “that whoever believes in Him.”
I had previously seen this text as a possible
proof text in support of a general election or even non-election viewpoint. But
seeing it in the Greek, I was forced to conclude that it could not accurately
be used to support either a non-election or an election viewpoint.
This is a relatively small example, I
suppose, but I think it serves to highlight the dangers of allowing our
familiarity with the text to determine and reinforce our theology. We must be
aware of our default to avoid the heavy work of thinking, and we must be
willing to refocus our attentions and reexamine the texts. We must endeavor to
disengage our autopilots as we read the Scriptures, and we must seek to read
them as they truly are.
What do you think? Are we at danger,
occasionally, of patting the wrong theological bottom? What must we do to avoid
those errors?
“Be
diligent to present yourself approved to God,
a worker
who does not need to be ashamed,
rightly
dividing the word of truth.”
2 Timothy
2:15
No comments:
Post a Comment