> human tendency of blaming externalities as to avoid serious self reflection
Everybody does it but you have to wonder why. What is the evolutionary purpose of denial?
Surely changing one's mind is often easier than changing the externalities, and surely the ability to change one's mind is the essence of adaption and adaptability? Or are we wrong to think so?
The only thing I can think of is that perhaps tribal signaling has a higher survival value for sinister reasons e.g. it's all very well an individual could introspect and change his/her mind but ultimately the next time there is a pogrom it better be very goddamn clear that you're a Red team/Blue team member...
It's actually really simple. An ability to see the world accurately was never a necessary condition for survival, so long as the model in your head was good enough to assure you could eat and reproduce.
People walk around with false stories/narratives (and increasingly intricate ones at that!) in their head not because it served some evolutionary purpose, but instead because it just wasn't consequential enough to prevent survival.
> It's actually really simple. An ability to see the world accurately was never a necessary condition for survival, so long as the model in your head was good enough to assure you could eat and reproduce.
Did you just read this in the latest Scott Adams post? I also agree with the way he is framing these issues. The Guy is a master persuader after all.
