Language Interpretation: Common Obstacles Which Create False Perceptions

MODULE 3

LANGUAGE INTERPRETATION: COMMON OBSTACLES WHICH CREATE FALSE PERCEPTIONS

Introduction

At this point we need to begin getting a little more specific in aiding our critical thought processes by identifying some of the more common techniques used by religious, political, educational, parental, and societal groups to influence our thinking in such a manner as to manipulate our perceptions in an attempt to controlor shape the decisions we make. The advertising media is one of the best examples of this, spending millions of dollars in an attempt to persuade you to purchase a specific product. So, we began with defining ‘truth’, then moved on to our perceptions of truth and illustrated how those perceptions might be manipulated by opinions disguised as facts. Below, I will discuss some of the more common language oriented obstacles which may influence our perceptions of truth as well as tools we use to solve problems.

A TROUBLESOME DUO: GENERALIZATION AND EGOTISM

Face it: we’re all egotistical to some extent. We tend to agree with those people, arguments, viewpoints, and decisions that validate our own beliefs. The combination of our own inclination toward egotism and arguments or opinions that are very general may make a very persuasive cocktail. Flattery is a good example of this. From our preteen years all the way through adulthood we’ve learned to flatter a person first before asking a favor. Often, at the end of a quarter when students hand to me their final exams, they’ll make very flattering, general comments like: “This was my favorite class” or “You’re one of the best instructors I’ve ever had.” Believe me; it’s very difficult to be objective when grading those papers. I’d hate to give a ‘D’ or an ‘F’ to a student who said I was the best or his/her favorite. Notice how their words are so general (“favorite”, “one of”, “best”) as to be almost meaningless yet they stroke my ego enough to possibly slant my thinking when it comes to a final grade.I have to be very careful not to let personal feelings affect the method I use for grading papers. People will very often influence our perceptions, opinions, and decisions using tactics which combine our own egotism with glib generalities to achieve their ends.

Let me give you an example of a technique a close friend of mine used to get dates with women he’d never met:

At any of the various nightclubs he’d frequent, he would begin searching for a single, attractive woman either alone or with female friends. Eventually he would identify the woman he’d like to meet.
Before his approach, he’d wait until she’d started on her second cocktail. This meant he didn’t have to pay for an extra drink, and, at the same time she would be more relaxed and receptive to an uninvited stranger.
Upon his approach, my friend would make a statement (not a question, like “Haven’t we met before?” which is usually met with the word ‘no’ and ends any hopes of a conversation) such as: “I think I know you.”(emphasizing the word ‘know’)
This statement automatically puts the woman on the spot. Her first reaction is guilt at not being able to identify this person now sitting across from her. Her reply, in most cases, would be of no consequence as my friend would move into phase four. Here he would say he felt as if he’d already known her for some time. To prove it, he would tell her to give him the palm of her hand where he could actually ‘see’ things about her life just by her touch.
Phase 5: (here’s where it gets good) As much as I can remember, here are a few of the statements he’d make:
“I see that you have had a tragedy or instance in your life which has hurt you deeply.”
“You have a tremendous amount of strength, courage, and stamina that even you are not aware of. This has helped you through these difficult times.”
“One of your fears is that people are attracted to you because of your unusually good looks, and that they’ll fail to see the real you.”
“You have a burning desire to accomplish something important in the future, and it is your motivation and courage which will help you to achieve that goal.”

…and on and on – you get the picture. ‘a’, ‘c’, and ‘d’ are so general that everyone has experienced those feelings at some point. Notice also how in ‘b’, ‘c’, and ‘d’ there is something said that is very ego satisfying. What killed me is that nine times out of ten it worked. He’d get more phone numbers in one night than I’d get in a month. How could these women fall for that stuff? Exactly…mixing generalities with how much people enjoy hearing good things about themselves from others, my friend was able to turn what could be a hostile “No!” or “Don’t bother me” into a lingering conversation that might last well into the night.

Don’t get me wrong, here. I’m not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. Just remember, though, that often we make decisions, judge arguments, or judge people based upon how well they agree with what we already believe rather than the intrinsic quality of the argument or person in question.

SO WHAT ARE THESE OBSTACLES THAT HINDER CRITICAL THINKING?

Some of the most common obstacles to critical thinking actually overlap. The point to be made here is that these obstacles, in a sense, may have already made up our minds for us about a problem, issue, or personwithout any in-depth critical analysis.Here are just a few:

Stereotyping: one of the most common. This is usually a thought or image that is attributed to a group of individuals under one specific name or description (the liberal, the Communist, the feminist, the gay person, the black athlete, the illegal immigrant).
The big problem here is that stereotyping judges a person upon the preconceived notion of the entire group (which is usually false or so general as to be useless).
Under this insensitive judgmental pattern people see gay men as weak and effeminate; Jews as wealthy but stingy; blacks as born athletes with little intelligence etc. This is not good.
We’ve judged a person’s character on unfounded information, and may pass up lucrative societal and financial possibilities by using the stereotype to rule our decision making process.
The following is a great example of stereotyping in an article published in the LA Times:

“…Clinton isn’t really black. But …he grew up in Arkansas eating collard greens and sweet potato pie. While campaigning in black churches, he clapped on the beat and knew the words to every song…after the noted author Toni Morrison, writing in the New Yorker in 1998, commented that she’d heard others refer to him (Bill Clinton) in that way.’After all, Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald’s-and-junk-food loving boy from Arkansas.’”[1] Because of this stereotype, Clinton became endeared to and won the black vote in 1992.

Egocentrism – just a fancy title for what I explained at the beginning of the module. This is a tendency for one to accept or believe that which best fits into or furthers one’s self-interest.It’s a natural inclination for almost everyone.
An ecological minded person would agree with legislation to forbid logging in a certain area because it might endanger an almost extinct bird.
Hunters might automatically be in favor of legislation allowing less strict gun controls.
As a student, one might agree with legislation that would lower tuition fees.
You agree with the instructor who praises your work while you begin to dislike the instructor who points out the flaws in your work.
Ethnocentrism (sometimes referred to as sociocentrism – another word you might use to impress to impress your friends): This is the same as egocentrism, but it is the tendency to accept or believe that which best fits or furthers the self interest of a group. Common examples could include:
Social:
Minorities (Blacks, Hispanics, Asians etc.) – just the word ‘minority’ carries with it a stigma of a person not in the mainstream and therefore less than equal to the ‘majority’.
Racists and white supremists: These are people who already believe that their race is superior to others both physically and intellectually.
The present day struggle for power in the Mideast between the Shiite and Sunni Muslims is also a good example.
Emphasizing math oriented professions for men because they are better at math than women.

Economic (poor, middle-class, upper middle-class, upper class) :
These are usually ranked in descending order beginning with upper class.A ranking such as this gives each class a feeling of superiority over the class or classes beneath it.
In this case people also tend to conform to the group with which they identify, even when it goes against their learned beliefs and values.

Authority: An excellent example of this (and the author gives you some good ones in Ch. 3)was an experiment conducted in the 1960’s(a shorter version of the following example is given in your text on pg. 53). Subjects were asked to administer electric shocks to people they could hear but could not see. The victims actually knew of the experiment and just faked their pain level with groans or screams even though no actual shock was being administered. The subjects were told that they were performing an experiment on the effects of punishment on learning. If the ‘victim’ failed to answer questions correctly they would be administered shocks ranging from 15 volts of electricity (a slight shock) to 450 volts of electricity (extremely severe shock). More than 85% of the subjects repeatedly gave shocks well over the 300 volt level, even after hearing the ‘victims’ crying out in pain or pounding on the walls to stop the shocks. At some points, the ‘victim’, for all the subjects knew, were eitherunconscious or dead. Even then, 65% of the subjects continued the shocks up to the 450 volt level as they had been instructed.This just shows that under the right conditions, authority moves us to perform actions clearly against our own personal beliefs or values. This becomes an important point to consider in the discussion of ‘nationalism’ below.
Nationalism (‘authority’ above often overlaps into this arena) – here we have a very large group usually defined by geographical boundaries in the form of a nation. People are led to believe that their nation is better than others, and that it stands for principles and ideals which further that nation’s best interests.
Pre World War II, the Germans felt that they were the master race; all other races were inferior and should eventually be exterminated. The mass extermination of the Jews was a direct result of this attitude.
The U.S.’s treatment of the American Indian as a non-literate, ignorant savage standing in the way of the U.S.’s march westward promoted the annihilation of an entire racial group.
Like egotism, nationalism is not necessarily bad. In times of economic, political, or social unrest, the ability of a nation’s people to unify themselves behind a just cause will often be enough to carry the nation unscathed through troubled waters. The American war effort during World War II is a great example of this. Never before or since in the history of the world has a nation done so much with such little time in order to guarantee its survival.

I have had several personal experiences which demonstrate many of the above examples, but there is one that stands out in my mind. I was travelling through Canada at a time when the Canadian dollar was worth about ¾ of the American dollar. I remember using a 20$ traveler’s check to purchase a couple of candy bars. I received $21 change in Canadian money. I asked the store owner how she felt about this (I know I’d be a little upset If someone purchased something from me, and the change I gave them was more than the purchase price). Her reply was that what she hated the most was how many Americans automatically assumed an aire of superiority to the point of rudeness, treating the shop owner as inferior because, compared to the American dollar, her Canadian money was inferior therefore making her and her country inferior to U.S. citizens and the United States in general.

Unwarranted Assumptions Which Lead To Stereotyping:
An unwarranted assumption is just something we take for granted without investigation. My example of the CPR case in Module I is a good illustration. The doctor on the scene made an unwarranted assumption with no evidence to back him up.
Unwarranted assumptionsoften lead us into stereotyping which I’ve already mentioned above. The term itself comes from the era of the printing press when plates or stereotypes were used to make identical copies of one page. In the same sense, when we stereotype, we classify people into groups with identical characteristics (All blacks are great athletes; politicians are all corrupt; Muslims are a violent religious sect; instructors are boring; women are weak and have no business in the workplace etc.). If you base your opinion or your argument upon a stereotype, then your argument is flawed because you are assuming that every individual included in the stereotype is identical. Nothing could be further from the truth.

How Do Semantics Affect Our Thinking?

Semantics is just a term used for how one might interpret what is being said or written. Three items to be addressed here are euphemisms, ‘denotation’, and ‘connotation’.

A euphemism is usually a word or phrase substituted for another word or phrase in order to slant the effect upon the reader or listener. Caught in a lie, one might say he/she “…stretched the truth”. It’s still a lie, though, but this phrase makes it sound less harmful (notice the use of the word “truth” as a defense rather than saying “I didn’t lie”; ‘lie’ giving the reader or listener a more negative reaction. “Putting a pet to sleep” is another euphemistic phrase used in place of the killing of an animal. One of the worst I’ve ever heard is: “He was killed by friendly fire.” No matter who did the shooting, the person that is shot or his/her relatives would not consider the bullets or grenade fragments that destroyed this person’s life as friendly. The one that really gets me, though, is ‘collateral damage’. A U.S. warplane is commanded to send a missile to strike a specific enemy target. If innocent people are killed in the process, they become collateral damage. This sounds much better than negligent homicide. This has occurred several times in the U.S.’s conflict in Iraq. In one case the missile actually landed on a wedding party, killing men, women, and children…collateral damage.The correct terms to be applied here should vary from negligent homicide to manslaughter, but that would give the impression that the U.S.’s actions were immoral and cruel.
Denotation means we take what is being said literally. If we take the book of Genesis (in the Bible) literally, then we believe that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh.
Connotation is how we interpret what is being said. God being God, probably didn’t need any rest. Since we invented the term ‘day’, how would god even define the word ‘day’? One might interpret this only to mean that a tremendous unifying force created the universe and life as we know it. Examples:
A red rose: Denotation – a red flower supported and given life by a green stem; Connotation – a symbol of passionate love.
Ass: Denotation – a donkey; Connotation - a compete jerk who respects no one, and cares only about his/her self interest (there are many other connotations to this word also, depending upon how it is used, voice inflection, mannerisms of the speaker etc). May also be used in reference to a part of the human body.
Companies use different types of logos specifically because of their connotations:
Chanel: two intertwined C’s; connotation: separation, as separating itself from traditional styles.
Prada: A triangle with a pentagon shaped crest; translates to supremacy and royalty.
Cheer detergent: eight petal flower; connotation is regeneration.
Pepsi: circle with red, white, and blue stripes on bottle cap; connotation is wholeness or world; market represents the USA.

We’ve covered quite a bit of material in this module, but just remember that we all have the human tendency to slant our opinions, beliefs, and judgments in the direction of least resistance. In other words, the above obstacles to acquiring critical thinking skills are only obstacles because they require the least amount of conscious thought or help us arrive at the most convenient conclusion.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

Identify three instances where your ego has made a decision for you (you made the decision specifically because you were flattered into it, or it made you feel better about yourself).
Describe the results of each of these three decisions. Which of them, if any, would you change if you could? Why?
The following is a description (one of many) of a specific sun sign. I won’t tell you which sign it is, but tell us if you feel it is a fair description of you, then tell us your sign: “You may be stubborn, but your grounded, steady demeanor makes you someone others can count on. You’re also a sensualist who loves good food, physical affection, romance and material goods –and only the best of everything.”[2]
Why do you think the above quote would be so believable to the reader?
Make the following into complete statements:
All athletes are
Gay men are
Homeless people are
Most Muslims are
Most male hair-stylists are
Looking back at your answers to #5, do you see any tendency towards stereotyping, ethnocentrism, or unwarranted assumptions?
Now share with us at least three characteristics (descriptive adjectives) you would use to describe the following:
Instructors
Parents
Obese people
You

If you’ve read the chapter material, the above lecture, and submitted your ‘discussion responses’, you should be ready to take the test for Module 3.