Imagine that you are a small hominid on the plains of Africa some 3 ½ million years ago, let’s say an Australopithecine. Now, suppose one day, while you're foraging in the open near to the trees, that you hear a rustle in the grass close to you. Suddenly you need to know, “is it just the wind, or is it a dangerous predator?”
Let’s suppose that you make a snap decision that it is a dangerous predator, and you quickly scamper to the nearest tree for safety. If it was just the wind, then you’ve made what’s called a Type I error in cognition, or a “false positive.” You thought the rustle was connected to something, and it wasn’t. You were wrong, but this type of error is relatively harmless, in that mostly, you’ll go a bit hungry at worst, for want of something to eat because you’re afraid to come out of your tree and forage.
But what if you think that the rustle was just wind, and it’s really a dangerous predator, and you stick around – you’re lunch. Now you’ve made a Type II error in cognition, a false negative, and you’ve just taken yourself out of the gene pool before you’ve reproduced. Why can’t we just stick around long enough to collect enough data to get the answer right? Well, the answer is that predators don’t hang around waiting for prey to collect more data – that’s why the stalk.
We are the descendants of, we evolved from, those who most consistently made Type I errors, and went on to reproduce, rather than Type II errors and got eaten.
But here’s where it goes wrong: although that snap decision based on a False Positive is relatively safe, it is also not based on reality. It makes an association between A and B (that A is somehow connected to B) that is not true. That’s the basis of superstition, and magical thinking. And that’s what we’ve evolved to do. And it’s the basis of the sort of thinking that leads to animism, superstition, and belief in gods. Because the difference between the wind and a predator is "intention," which is something that we unconsciously attach to the object of our false positive.
And that's why more humans believe in gods, spirits, ghosts and a host of other not demonstrably true things than do not. And that's why I think that people who opt for true rational thinking can escape that trap.
Let’s suppose that you make a snap decision that it is a dangerous predator, and you quickly scamper to the nearest tree for safety. If it was just the wind, then you’ve made what’s called a Type I error in cognition, or a “false positive.” You thought the rustle was connected to something, and it wasn’t. You were wrong, but this type of error is relatively harmless, in that mostly, you’ll go a bit hungry at worst, for want of something to eat because you’re afraid to come out of your tree and forage.
But what if you think that the rustle was just wind, and it’s really a dangerous predator, and you stick around – you’re lunch. Now you’ve made a Type II error in cognition, a false negative, and you’ve just taken yourself out of the gene pool before you’ve reproduced. Why can’t we just stick around long enough to collect enough data to get the answer right? Well, the answer is that predators don’t hang around waiting for prey to collect more data – that’s why the stalk.
We are the descendants of, we evolved from, those who most consistently made Type I errors, and went on to reproduce, rather than Type II errors and got eaten.
But here’s where it goes wrong: although that snap decision based on a False Positive is relatively safe, it is also not based on reality. It makes an association between A and B (that A is somehow connected to B) that is not true. That’s the basis of superstition, and magical thinking. And that’s what we’ve evolved to do. And it’s the basis of the sort of thinking that leads to animism, superstition, and belief in gods. Because the difference between the wind and a predator is "intention," which is something that we unconsciously attach to the object of our false positive.
And that's why more humans believe in gods, spirits, ghosts and a host of other not demonstrably true things than do not. And that's why I think that people who opt for true rational thinking can escape that trap.