Seemingly lost among controversies regarding academic and corporate “equity” training programs is 1.) whether such training is the best way to accomplish its stated goal, and 2.) whether it works at all. In examining the first question, we may assume that “education” has some sort of universal application; that it possible for example to “teach” empathy, or any other emotion for that matter. It also assumes that education can over-ride or suppress inherent cognitive processes that appear biased but are in fact quite useful and potent in dealing with novelty and uncertainty.
Assuming for the sake of argument that educational and training programs can achieve such goals, one may reasonably ask if a particular doctrine or curriculum is an effective approach, whether it is the only such approach, and whether it is the best approach. Even if it is accepted that such training accomplishes something, there remains the issue of whether a particular curriculum or doctrine can be critiqued. An odd characteristic of anti-racism, for example, is that critiquing anti-racism doctrine is proof of racism. Obviously, the assertion is fallacious, as it would lead to the absurd conclusion that the inquiry as to whether there are better ways to achieve anti-racist outcomes is itself racist.
The larger issue is whether certain aspects of cognitive functioning, such as using analogies to fill in missing information, and recognizing patterns in data to draw inferences can either be taught, or more relevantly, can be unlearned.
A seminal question is whether a person can “learn” emotions that he otherwise would not experience, or not experience with significant intensity. It is reasonable to ask if a person can “learn” empathy, or merely learn to behave as though he had empathy. The same question applies to other emotions. Would we think of teaching someone to feel grief, or joy, or remorse? One obvious point that may be raised is whether people can be made to hate. The question is not, however whether a person who is incapable of hating can be taught to do so, but whether a person who is otherwise capable of hating can be made to direct that hatred to a particular object. The issue is not one of education, but one of manipulation and conditioning.
Emotions have purposes and likely also have sound evolutionary and social rationales. They exist for a reason, and that reason may be wholly unrelated to a particular social doctrine or ideology. In all likelihood, teaching someone, or simply conditioning someone to behave as though they have empathy or grief, or whatever, does not achieve the evolutionary purposes that the desired emotion has. It likely is not possible to teach empathy, only an ersatz, play-acting imitation of it.
Similarly, it is probably not possible to educate someone out of “biases” or other useful cognitive devices that are essential for dealing with novelty and uncertainty in the world. A quick thought experiment might be to imagine walking in a forest and encountering a large animal that you have never seen before standing in the path. Would you pet it? Regardless of how you respond, the answer will betray a bias. There is likely no way for this bias to be eradicated by self-reflection, confession, or role-playing. The issue is not one of good biases and bad biases, it is rather of biases and no biases, and no biases is incompatible with normal experience.
This situation is exacerbated by an ambiguity. In fact some biases can be learned, but again this is a matter of how the capacity for using biases as a means for dealing with a complex world can be manipulated for insular purposes. It is certainly the case that children can be taught things that are not true, and this applies when the subject of such teaching is other people or groups of people. Children can be taught that members of another race or religion are somehow bad, but this simply affects a given state of knowledge and can be changed. Beliefs about a subject which are instilled by education or indoctrination can be unlearned, without affecting the underlying ability to learn, believe or discern. There are functionally at least two distinct types of biases: those that are inherent and essential to cognitive functioning and decision-making in circumstances of novelty and uncertainty, and which cannot be changed by “training,” and those that are taught, in which case they are simply one item in the class of things that can be taught, and which includes their negation.
So anti-bias or anti-racism training is of limited use. It may be beneficial in highlighting issues, but cannot change anything more substantive than volatile beliefs, which are likely to be changed by the next social fad.
No comments:
Post a Comment