The Deception of Perception

One of the great ethical debates has been unfolding before our eyes. It was the bombing of a suspected boat thought to be carrying drugs which was destroyed by our military. First, Trump said he would release the footage taken of the strike including the two men who were killed in a second strike. Were they innocent survivors or was it a war crime? If it was a war crime, then someone should be held accountable. The possibilities are murder, a war crime or an event that was under the heading of collateral damage.

One Democrat senator indicated it was the worst thing that he had seen in his life while a Republican Senator brushed it off as something that happens in war.  This raised the question of whether this event was part of a legal war on narco-terrorists. Trump said that he didn’t see the video, but it wouldn’t be something that he would do. He passed the buck to Hegseth who in turn passed the buck to the military leader in charge. The video of the survivors before being killed has still not been released by Hegseth as Trump changed his mind and indicated that it is Hegseth’s decision.

I could give you the ethical arguments that would deal with all the divergent views on this, but right now I want to focus on the question: How could two people see the same event and come away with such extreme different views of this event?

First, it is not that the Democrat or Republican are not telling the truth. They are seeing what they saw, but what made them see that event differently? A course that I took at Yale and Malcolm Gladwell’s book, Blink, provide an answer.

I took a course at Berkeley at Yale on Phenomenology of Perception. It was one of the most challenging courses that I had there. It is a study of experience focusing on how things appear to us. It is a course that demonstrates how our ideas shape our perception of the world. It was like looking at one of those drawings where you are asked what you see, an old woman or a beautiful young girl. You must be looking for one to perceive it.

It is the kind of experience that yields lateral thinking or thinking outside of the box such as a scientist trying to put pieces of a puzzle together to see a solution. Our text, Phenomenology of Perception was written by one of the founders of this school of thought, Maurice Merleau-Ponty. The professor was a legend, and the class soared to understand the complex views. The professor and I became friends. He attended Vicki and my wedding in Raleigh and joked about fearing going that far south as a Yankee.

The class helped me a great deal in relationships particularly as counselor to others as it points out the importance of seeing people and events for who they really are and be objective. In essence, you must leave your biases and prejudices outside the door leading to understanding the other person or event. It also helped me to see connections to various issues that aren’t readily seen as connected.

There is a classic study done that makes the point about the deception of perception. The study is referred as “They Saw a Game”.

“This is a classic study in selective perception demonstrating how Princeton and Dartmouth fans viewed their opponents ‘blatantly unsportsmanlike’ play.” Although dated, its conclusions are just as relevant as if presented today.

They Saw A Game Study 

Malcolm Gladwell, a current thought leader, took another approach to phenomenology in his book, Blink. He points out seeing a perspective on something where you are making a quick decision is perfected by the art of “thin slicing” filtering out the very few factors that matter from an overwhelming number of variables.

His book begins with an example that is too common in the news. It is the killing of Amadou Diallo by four New York City Police officers. The officers saw the victim standing in the vestibule of his apartment building. The police called to him. Diablo may have feared that they were criminals. He ran inside his building and took out his wallet which the police mistook for a gun. The officer shot him. The other officers thought that their colleague was shot. In less than 10 seconds four officers fired 41 shots, 9 of which hit and killed the unarmed Diallo. After questioning the officers, there were several factors that went into the tragedy: Stress, implicit biases of many varieties where they had what Gladwell calls “Mind Blindness.”

If one witnesses the division in our nation between the good people and the bad people naming their opponents as bad and them as good the same dynamic is in operation. There is right and wrong as ethical norms, but we quickly move to judgement because of the perceptions we bring to any decision. The Epstein files and the shooting of unarmed sailors on a boat that was thought to have drugs on board have been divisive issues. We need to see our differences now as the other party not telling lies as much as decisions containing a whole host of bias. Phenomenology tells us that true dialogue is not interested in who has the best argument but that we are each a collection of all that we have experienced. This would reduce the blame game that is at the heart of what is occurring in Washington.