on the utility of being correct
Once upon a time, I believed in Truth. It was out there, and I could find it, and when I did, I would Understand Everything. (Hell, I majored in Physics at least partly b/c it promised to reveal to me The Truth about The Universe. Also, I'm bad at math.) So I went to MIT, and I met a bunch of people who also think the pursuit of Truth is not just an awesome thing, but The Way to Live Your Life. This had some fabulous side-effects, like a bias towards wanky arguments and/or incurable pedantry as a form of entertainment and the optimal form of discourse; while we aren't quite as stridently text-based as, perhaps, our intellectual counterparts at U-Chicago or St. John's, that's probably because we're interrogating Reality, not just Culture. The assumption is that there exists objective truth in the world, and it is knowable by us if only we research carefully enough, and once we've determined the Truth of a situation, we will be able to act Properly, for Right.
I find these habits, however, not all that applicable when it comes to systems involving people. We are not wavefunctions, sorry. Nor are the systems in place for modeling ensembles of people at all good (Econ and Psych, I'm glaring at you.) In fact, in some cases, they lead people to some ridiculously offensive conclusions. Understanding the "objective truth" about whether women *really are* less good at science than men is not going to help you figure out whether condescending to an individual woman scientist is wrong or not, and does not excuse institutional bias against women in academia. I have no desire to find a "gay gene" even if it would revolutionize the field, because it is irrelevant; you still shouldn't discriminate against queers. Ditto whether trans men and women are "really" men and women "inside" - seriously, what? The Truth about why I love who I love, fuck who I fuck, and present as the gender(s) I do is not accessible, but if it were? I still wouldn't tell you about it.
(For anyone wondering about why I'm bringing this up now, of all times, it's that a bunch of this crystallized after watching comment after comment get hung up on "But that's not what's *in* the text!" and "That's not what the author meant in their heart of hearts" and dismissing the criticism wholesale in the event of a single factual error. There are grounds for this, especially if you believe in objective truth, but it should be obvious that unless the entire premise is a misunderstanding (like, say, railing against the violence in Watchmen because it's a comic book, and comic books are for kids!!), the criticism is not totally worthless. Middle ground exists here, and can be addressed, even if reality seems to be misrepresented somewhat. Really, what’s the worse that will happen?)
So, I've been gradually devaluing "correctness", not because it's wrong (I mean, objectively, the "correct" path is definitionally right) but because I don't think it's important. It's not how I want to live my life all the time, and I think blind pursuit of Truth prevents me from noticing important things. I'm still wrangling with myself about how far I think this extends; in some situations, I definitely run into contradictions between my self-identity as a Scientist and Fair-Minded Person, and my general empathy with the oppressed (which trumps, um, a lot. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)
I find these habits, however, not all that applicable when it comes to systems involving people. We are not wavefunctions, sorry. Nor are the systems in place for modeling ensembles of people at all good (Econ and Psych, I'm glaring at you.) In fact, in some cases, they lead people to some ridiculously offensive conclusions. Understanding the "objective truth" about whether women *really are* less good at science than men is not going to help you figure out whether condescending to an individual woman scientist is wrong or not, and does not excuse institutional bias against women in academia. I have no desire to find a "gay gene" even if it would revolutionize the field, because it is irrelevant; you still shouldn't discriminate against queers. Ditto whether trans men and women are "really" men and women "inside" - seriously, what? The Truth about why I love who I love, fuck who I fuck, and present as the gender(s) I do is not accessible, but if it were? I still wouldn't tell you about it.
(For anyone wondering about why I'm bringing this up now, of all times, it's that a bunch of this crystallized after watching comment after comment get hung up on "But that's not what's *in* the text!" and "That's not what the author meant in their heart of hearts" and dismissing the criticism wholesale in the event of a single factual error. There are grounds for this, especially if you believe in objective truth, but it should be obvious that unless the entire premise is a misunderstanding (like, say, railing against the violence in Watchmen because it's a comic book, and comic books are for kids!!), the criticism is not totally worthless. Middle ground exists here, and can be addressed, even if reality seems to be misrepresented somewhat. Really, what’s the worse that will happen?)
So, I've been gradually devaluing "correctness", not because it's wrong (I mean, objectively, the "correct" path is definitionally right) but because I don't think it's important. It's not how I want to live my life all the time, and I think blind pursuit of Truth prevents me from noticing important things. I'm still wrangling with myself about how far I think this extends; in some situations, I definitely run into contradictions between my self-identity as a Scientist and Fair-Minded Person, and my general empathy with the oppressed (which trumps, um, a lot. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)