They, like most people, are small-c Burkean conservatives about life in general. They have a strong status quo bias, but rather than admit this like Edmund Burke, they feel compelled to invent reasons why status quo things are good. Berkeley psychology prof Seth Roberts said “Most of my students, for better or worse, were very conformist. My conclusion…. is that the reasons we give for our beliefs have roughly zero correlation with the actual reasons and shouldn’t be taken seriously (e.g., argued with).” Robin Hanson said the same about George Mason students:
- Ask random colleges student random policy questions and they will feel compelled to come up with opinions.
- Ask them for reasons for those opinions and they’ll feel compelled to come up with such reasons.
- Such opinions strongly tend to support the status quo – mostly whatever is, is assumed good.
I am thinking along similar lines today after discussing organ markets with my students. Students say that legal markets in human organs would be bad mainly because it would lead to organ theft
. Even supposing there would be more organ thefts, it is hard to imagine there would be enough to outweigh the deaths of 9000 Americans every year caused
by our current ban on organ sales. If people were used to a functioning market in organs, I have to think they would be horrified by someone saying we should ban organ sales and consign thousands to death in order to reduce theft, just as it would seem crazy to ban day-laboring to protect laborers from employers who stiff them after a day’s work (stealing is already illegal!). It is easier to think there must be a good reason for the status quo, that we live in the best
of all possible worlds and aren’t doing something horrible
. Indeed, there is more right with the world than wrong with it; there is a reason status-quo-biased people continue to survive and thrive. Further, it is dangerous to think that those who disagree with you must do so out of some ignorant bias; call this the “bias bias”.
In general though, if we are trying to figure out the truth, we have to fight pro-status-quo bias more often than its opposite. The reason for this is wired into our brains: our dominant trait is to rationalize, not reason. One part of our brain is dedicated to coming up with a reason for anything, whether it makes sense or not. In extreme cases, paralyzed people can come up with all sorts of reasons to explain why they aren’t really paralyzed; their brain is acting as an apologist for what is done, not a reasoned truth-seeker
(Seriously, check out that link- it is way more interesting than my post, even if you have heard of the phenomenon before).
I am optimistic about getting people who think of themselves as non-conformist or politically liberal to consider new ideas by telling them they are being conservative conformists. Put name-calling to good use!