Horace
Mann, the father of the United States public school system, claimed that education
is the great equalizer of mankind. Though formal, classroom based education is
what first comes to mind when one thinks of learning, in reality our minds are
exposed, maybe even overexposed, to a landslide of information and news every
day. Some of these everyday perceptions can be easily recognized as more objective
than others—when a meeting will take place or where the president will be
traveling. However, what may seem to be fairly objective statistics and figures
reported on the news or published in a paper may be ironically fabricated in
the interests of its creators, prompting one to realize that knowledge can only
succeed in bringing mankind to a skewed sense of equity.
In
lecture and in readings throughout the past couple of weeks we have studied
examples of how perception and the action of processing ideas can be influenced
by virtually everything that determines our identity as individuals; culture,
economic background, and occupation are just a few examples. Though how we
process information and form opinions are determined on a personal level, a lot
of the time the information we are exposed to have already been slightly
distorted. In the gap between pure numbers and their respective meanings, the
interpretation of facts can be construed to highlight certain points and push
others into obscurity. In Global Health:
Why Cultural Perceptions, Social Representation, and Biopolitics Matter, Nichter
draws attention to an example of how this subtle rhetoric of biased communication
affects medical anthropology: “Governments and NGOs may be put into a position
in which attracting global funds depends on showing that a significant health
needs exists. In such cases, statistics may be manufactured, manipulated, or
tailored to draw funding” (121). The paradox of biased truths plays a large
role in making decisions that could impact the health of entire communities, proving
its authority and establishment in even well funded research campaigns from
respected organizations. By using specific forms of sampling, targeting certain
communities, and choosing which tests to run on raw numbers, any set of data
can be presented in a multitude ways. But
although the manipulation of numbers to fit certain needs seems like a selfish
and almost criminal rhetoric to follow, in the context of circumstance even everyday
citizens, much more than corporate agenda setters, may do it without realizing.
The
human mind is inclined to find ways of piecing together information and making
logical conclusions as a way of organizing the avalanche of information it
encounters every second. For the sake of convenience, since most of the time
what is seen and heard falls into many overlapping categories, I think that
sometimes our thought processes can come to a rushed conclusion that paints a
false but favorable reality. This Calvin
and Hobbes comic provides an example of this kind of rhetoric. Though it’s
apparent that there are no monsters underneath Calvin’s bed when he calls for
them, he doesn't accept it. Instead he provokes them into coming out, almost
willing them into being, implying that he has allowed the small kernel of doubt
in his mind to inflate into the realm of reality. A variety of causes could
have prompted this behavior—does he not want to go to sleep? Is he being sent
to bed early as a punishment for misbehaving? It’s the circumstances surrounding
a situation that shape one’s actions and give purpose to our thoughts. Applying this idea to the quote from our class
reading, it sheds a new light on why the governments and NGOs mentioned in
Nichter’s writing shape the realities of their findings into conclusions that benefit
their campaigns in order to gain funding. They see an opportunity for improvement,
the expansion of their organization, and the chance to act on their objectives for
improving global health. Though the logic behind creating white lies and distorting
the truth stems from unchangeable conditions and context, is it enough to
justify the presentation of modified information?
Just
as circumstance plays a large role in molding our perceptions of the world and
the actions we take, it complicates the act of making decisions and judgments. When
thinking about the governments and NGOs that manipulate data into fuel for
their campaigns, it’s logical to think of their approach as devious. Their
methods of gaining funding by presenting data through only one specific
viewpoint definitely make some feel mislead and bring discredit to the
organizations that are supposedly doing noble deeds for those who are
suffering. However, given that their perceptions are shaped by circumstances
different than ours, it may not be fair to jump to such victimizing
conclusions.
Sometimes the awareness of the omnipresence of
bias is enough to reduce the feeling of anatagonization between a single individual
and a multifaceted organization. The Road
follows the journey of a middle aged father and his young son as they travel
along a highway to survive the lawless chaos of a post-apocalyptic United
States. After the father is shoots a man that threatens his son’s safety, he
attempts to explain the rhetoric behind his act of violence to his innocent
son:
"You wanted to know what the bad guys looked
like. Now you know. It may happen again. My job is to take care of you. I was
appointed to do that by God. I will kill anyone who touches you. Do you
understand?
Yes.
[The son] sat there cowled in the blanket. After a
while he looked up. Are we still the good guys? he said.
Yes. We're still the good guys.
And we always will be.
Yes. We always will be." (McCarthy 64-65).
Generally an act of violence in self defense
is considered justified. However, the son’s doubt in their moral standing highlights
the fragility of the border between what is considered morally right and wrong.
To the reader and to the father, the father's action was considered “good” because it
meant their survival. On the other hand, to the relatives of the dead man, the father
would clearly be considered “evil”. The same change of perspective can be applied to
Nichter’s example and the Calvin and Hobbes comic; to some the specific
filtering of statistics is not an ethical problem if it’s utilized for
improving the health of others. Similarly, Calvin’s belief in monsters may be
justified based on his personal experiences. Confusingly enough, there is a lot of grey area due to individual nuances in perception. Because of the multitude of backgrounds and
experiences people view the world through, it’s impossible to view the world
through anything but a colored lens. Rather than focusing on the ethics and
justification of a case, focusing on identifying and being aware of potential
bias and having open-mindedness toward examining a situation from different perspectives
may lead to better understanding and communication.
McCarthy, Cormac. The Road. 2006.
Nichter, Mark. Global
Health: Why Cultural Perceptions, Social Representation, and Biopolitics Matter.
(2008).
No comments:
Post a Comment