Like just about everyone else, I was shocked when Donald
Trump won the election for President of the United States. I expected Hilary Clinton would squeak
in with a slight majority and I reassured myself, even if Trump did get
elected, the system of checks and balances in the governmental system would
hold him in check. Now, I am not
so sure. How I feel doesn't matter
but I do have one insight to offer.
Even the big picture thinkers I admire the most, like
Malcolm Gladwell, had gotten it wrong.
The reason I suspect is that we got drowned in a "sea of
sameness" (an expression that I am sure comes from some source, which I do
not take any credit for). I know I
have a tendency to gravitate to sources I respect, whether it is the Guardian,
The New York Times or CBC. But
these are sources of information that are interpreted in ways that confirm what
I already believe. They are
sources of validation for my own personal values. I might acquire new ways of
defending viewpoints I already held but I wasn't going to get my opinions
changed. I bet I am not alone.
Until the elections results unfolded, I had no appreciation
that Obama was so disliked. It was
unimaginable to me that women would "forgive" Trump's behaviour and
comments. Although I was not a
Clinton fan either, I could not foresee that Latinos would vote against her.
I heard a commentary on CBC recently that observed there are
basically two ways of rationalization.
You could reason like a scientist and follow the evidence ( a version of
the empirical system) or you could reason like a lawyer, which still has its
basis in emotion. You decided
where you wanted to end up and then came up with the defence. I am sure this has applications that I
could take into my personal and professional life. A distant memory surfaced from my days studying philosophy
at what was then Loyola College in Montreal. We had a dynamite professor who divided our session into two
halves. For the first half, you
might be assigned the role of a Platonist and in the second half a
Cartesian. The subject of
discussion, the issue, remained the same but you were forced into taking
opposing sides. It was good mental discipline. I should practice a version of it to gain a better understanding
of the world around me. I might
even watch FOX News every once in awhile.
