Centerfield

I'n an earlier post, Why Do Reasonable People Differ I claim it comes down to personal experience.

In terms of nature vs. nature, smart people on both sides have been endowed with similar brainpower. Where we differ is on nurture--not just parenting, but what we experience as members of different religions, ethnic groups, social classes, and also random events which tip us one way or the other (e.g. whether we've ever been mugged) . We also tend to overvalue what has happened to us personally even if it is not the norm.

I've got a thought, and also a little bit of a golden rule that I at least try to follow. This might actually be worth a post when I have time.

In psychology, they talk about something called the "fundamental attribution error." It's been a while so forgive me if I butcher it a bit and correct me if I'm astray. It says that people tend to attribute their own motives and deeds to circumstances but the motives and deeds of others to their nature: that they are acting with (malicious) intent." To use an ordinary example: Maybe I'm in a hurry to get somewhere and I sneak the car into a tight spot and cut someone off a little. They honk their horn and I'm thinking "sorry buddy but I'm in a hurry I'm late picking up my kid from daycare and they're starting to panic." The guy I cut off is just thinking "you selfish ignorant pr!*%ck."

Now what I TRY to do is follow a rule a professor helped me develop along the lines of "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity, and never attribute to stupidity what cen be explained by ignorance/lack of understanding." In other words, make an effort to give others the benefit of the doubt you'de give yourself. So really it's just a flavor of the golden rule. It's not easy. I'm not great at it by any means...next time someone cuts you off in traffic, try thinking "maybe he didn't see me" or "well he must be in the middle of an emergency". It's not easy or satisfying. Or even likely :-)

A very nice way of explaining the basic idea. Certainly worth a post, when you have the time.

I don't pretend that people will actually start following, or trying to follow, that kind of rule. I just think it's nice when people like Drezner and the folks as OxBlog discuss the overwhelming incivility of the blogosphere. Putting it on the table is a good first step.

Brian,

I've never heard of this before, but it's fascinating. Please expand on it when you have a chance.

This is exactly what I see in attacks on Bush. Our inability to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is assumed not to be evidence that the Administration was blinkered, made errors, but rather that it was all part of a maniacal plan. Moderates offer people the benefit of the doubt. Extremists give people the detriment of the doubt.

Well, that explains a lot, actually. Try to move the conversation into a more humane place, and the freaking vultures flock all over you...