According to Kathryn Schulz, her book Being Wrong is "about what happens when our beliefs, including our most fundamental, convincing, and important ones fail us" (91). She then goes into defining what belief is, and it turns out that Schulz's coverage of belief and how it works assists in illuminating why beliefs have consequences and carry weight.
Later, Schulz notes that "every one of us confuses our models of the world with the world itself--not occasionally or accidentally but necessarily" (107). That confusion and our assumptions about those who believe differently than we do explains why conflicts arise and become increasingly problematic.
Of the three assumptions that she mentioned (Ignorance, Idiocy, and Evil), which one was most compelling to you and why?
Of the three assumptions that Schulz mentioned, the one regarding ignorance was the most compelling to me. On page 109, she states "we assume that other people are ignorant because we assume that we are not; we think we know that facts, and we think those facts determine our beliefs." I found this to be intriguing because I felt as though I could relate to it quite well. I am guilty of thinking that I know exceptionally more than I truly do, and as a result, I regard others as not knowing as much as I do.
The Evil Assumption was most compelling to me because I have encountered people and situations that exhibit this type of logic.
Ignorance is the most compelling to me because everyone is ignorant in their own ways-including me. Ignorance comes in many forms and can sometimes be offensive to other people. People experience and display ignorance everyday.
I agree with Kellsey; The assumptions that we make about others based on their apparent ignorance. We hold ourselves, our beliefs, above those of others. Ignorance has to be the leading cause of discourse on so many topics.
one is not more compelling than the other. I agree with the concept presented and how she lists, describes, and correlates them. They all are interdependent. I especially identify with the ignorance assumption and the evil assumption. I always believe that people are either A. uneducated on the subject or B. just evil.
Of the three assumptions that she describes, the one that talks about ignorance is the most compelling to me because she says that we assume people to be ignorant because we think that we know everything. This is compelling to me because I think that people do do this and when they do assume that people are ignorant it makes them ignorant.
The most compelling assumption to me was the Ignorance assumption. I found it to be the most compelling because we humans are always quick to say people are ignorant simply because we know more about a certain subject than they do. I think it's ironic we judge so quickly but we are ignorant ourselves.
Ignorance was the most compelling to me because ignorance exists everywhere unpeople of all ages. You can be ignorant about anything from politics to groceries. It lives everyday.
The assumption that was the most compelling to me was ignorance. In one sentence she states, "Since we think our own beliefs are based on the facts, we conclude that people who disagree with us just haven't been expose to the right information..." This was compelling to me because it shows how easily we believe that we are right and the other person is wrong. It also shows how hard it is for us to trust another person's information.
Ignorance was the most compelling to me personally because I could relate to it the most. I often times feel like my opinions and beliefs are right and if you don't agree, you're wrong or unintelligent which is not necessarily the best way to think.
Although, I believe that all of three of Schulz assumptions are valid and support one another, I found the Ignorance assumption to be the most interesting. This is because whenever people enter debates with other people they automatically assume that their opponent is ignorant. I find this ridiculous because it puts people in a position where there is no room for differing opinions. The person either agrees with you or they are ignorant. It makes no sense.
The assumption of ignorance was most compelling to me because growing up I have always been in advanced programs in school and I was always a step or two ahead of people. When I came to college it became very clear to me that I am not ahead of everybody and that there is always someone a step ahead of me.
Ignorance is the most compelling assumption to me. The fact that people assume other people are ignorant makes them ignorant themselves because they have also assumed they know everything. This lends itself to the fact that everybody has ignorance in them.
I believe that all of the assumptions listed are compelling and they correlate with each other. The way the author put them in order made it even more better. The ignorance is probably what I most identify with because it happens all around me on a day to day basis and I'm sure I am guilty of it too. I hear a lot of 'cuz it's true reasons for the way people believe and a lot of probably do tend to believe things because it's "obvious".
The assumption on ignorance was most compelling, because at some point in life everyone displays ignorance.
Post a Comment