"When we try to understand the behavior of others, we often make a particularly human mistake. We tend to attribute too much to character and disposition and too little to situation and context. When we seek a better balance, we can adopt a more accepting view of events around us." -- Malcom Gladwell
"And this doubly true when processing text comments made by avatars in a virtual world as a primary means of communication"
-- Hotspur O'TooleYHN had an interesting encounter tonight, and the more it is replayed mentally, the more interesting it becomes. YHN was at an event in Second Life. He made a comment that someone took out of context, and the individual made a veiled threat to mute him. YHN was a bit shocked at this-- the individual had displayed a sort of dull hostility from time to time, as well as being rather sharp-tongued, but YHN had always found that to be in keeping with the role that person was playing in world.
The ensuing dialogue brought to mind a problem that Second Life, or any other virtual world would be challenged to solve-- fundamental attribution error and its impact on roleplaying. Fundamental Attribution Error is a term YHN has brought up from time to time because he feels that the environment of virtuality exacerbates its impact. The fundamental attribution error (FAE) is a common type of cognitive bias in social psychology. Essentially, the fundamental attribution error involves placing a heavy emphasis on
internal personality characteristics to explain someone's behavior in a given situation, rather than thinking about external situational factors. The flip side of the fundamental attribution error is the actor-observer bias, in which people tend to over-emphasize the role of a situation in their behaviors and under-emphasize the role of their own personalities.
YHN is as guilty of this as the next man. How could he not be, when he has only text and an animated dolly to process intentions from? YHN clearly erred tonight, as the following dialogue can attest:
(edited for grammar and spelling.. it was late in the evening and typos prevailed. Names removed for privacy's sake and "victorianisms" edited out. This is out of respect for all parties involved and not an exercise in editorial license. )
(after a publicly veiled threat to hit mute)
YHN: Was that directed at me?
___________: It was.
YHN: Indeed? What for?
______________________: If you suspected it was directed at you, you must have some idea what for.
YHN: No, I do not, hence the inquiry.
______________________: You remarked about _______. The usual connotation between ____ and _____ is one of ______. I find this both upsetting and offensive,
and it is hardly the first time you have said things that have affected me so.
(the blanks reference what she interpreted as an offensive remark-- the nature of which is unimportant. A sad attempt at humor by YHN that backfired)YHN: There is another meaning that you might be overlooking or ignorant of.
YHN: Perhaps, purposefully.
YHN: ___________________________________
(the long blank is an alternative interpretation of the same phrase, with a VERY different context)______________________: Ah. I have only heard that as "___________".
(this references the version that the other party had heard, which differs from the one stated by the author above in one key aspect)YHN: That was my meaning. In any event, if you choose to be offended by my presence, I have no objections to being muted. Mute away.
______________________: That would be a last resort. I have never muted anyone, and feel I may be missing something of value to me and mine if I were to do so, to anyone. You do tempt me, however.
YHN: As have you me, to be honest, on several occasions. But I persevere, and I am delighted you do as well. Perhaps we shall find that delicate middle ground.
YHN: If you do choose the last resort, I would request a polite notice, though, as it would spare us both the embarrassment of speaking to a mute object. :-D
______________________: I'll give that request due consideration, if indeed it should come to that.
YHN: To use the obvious pun "
no more need be said"... however, one last item of curiosity, what have I said that offended you in the past? This is (the only time I mentioned the activity that offends you) that I can recall.
______________________: I would ask you the same question, but maybe we shouldn't stir up the past?
YHN: tit for tat, and I asked first.
______________________: Quite honestly, I have put the details from my mind -- all but the generally intolerant attitude you display toward a certain group.
YHN: That is your interpretation, and I respect that. I don't consider myself intolerant at all, but that point has been debated to death.
______________________: Much of society is an agreed interpretation, after all.
YHN: Still, using the word
intolerance is to use an emotionally charged word, akin to calling someone a "
racist" perhaps.
______________________: There are many forms of intolerance. Why would you focus upon that one?
YHN: Really? I'm interested in the shades of definition you stating as linguistic fact. An example of two different kinds of intolerance, please?
______________________: As I said: many kinds. There is
artistic intolerance, which can be seen in a hatred of modern music and all who like it, for example. Or
intellectual intolerance, which expresses itself in prejudice against those perceived to be less quick-witted. Or intolerance for those
poorer, or
richer, than oneself. Or for those who favor an opposing sports team to yours.
YHN: Don't all those speak to the same
nature of action? A general dislike for something? Changing the object of the dislike does not change the fundamental nature of the action itself.
______________________: Perhaps. But none of those things is
racism.
______________________: If I had meant that, I would have said it.
YHN: I don't doubt that! In this case, I think the analogy might apply, because racism singles out a specific group or race of people, and in a virtual sense, is this not what you have just accused me of?
YHN:
Racism, by your lights, being an "intolerance" for a sort of person?
______________________: Your attacks and petty jabs have been against their particular mannerisms and affectations. You have obviously been friendly with people of different skin colors, so I would not have used the word
racist, myself. Are you telling me that it is an appropriate usage?
YHN: No, as I aver above, I equate your use of the word 'intolerant' to be the ethical and moral equivalent of referring to me as a 'racist against (the group you are holding up as examples)', a mantle I would not accept, any more than anyone else would.
YHN: And 'petty' and "attack" are the spin that you are placing on things, I suspect, merely because we don't share the same sense of humor.
______________________: Regardless of our inability to agree upon terminology, I have commitments, as I said, off grid, and must go. There is nothing that says we must have the same sense of humor, or even get along. all we must do is be civil to each other in public, as society requires. Good night.
YHN: Good night, then.
Note the key elements:
- YHN was attempting a feeble joke that could be interpreted two ways. He certainly KNEW of the other interpretation, it just didn't come immediately to mind when he said the first statement. Perception error from the start.
- In the ensuing discussion, my correspondent communicated the alternative interpretation of the phrase, and I could see my mistake. In a perfect world we could have both chalked it off to poor or non-communication, resolved the gaffe with a contrite explanation, and moved on. However, there were other factors in play here and it affected this outcome. Clearly, the offended individual held other pre-conceived negative notions about YHN, all of them based upon cognitive biases held by that individual and as seems more likely, the individual's peer group as well. Some of them might even have been justified, some not.
- Further FAE problems crop up around the blithe use of the word "intolerance".. For YHN, this is very negatively charged word, to be equated with "hatred" and, yes, "racism" in a certain context. YHN admits he can grow quite heated when people apply a cognitive bias to the term and exchange a statement of preference (e.g. "I don't like this comic book" "I prefer green") for "intolerance" (e.g., "I hate this or that sort of person"). I would have loved to have challenged my correspondent to a review of exactly what was said by YHN pertaining to the group being cited, where, and when-- and suggest alternative context so that another side of the picture (perhaps one less emotionally charged than "intolerant") might be perceived. As in the case of the first comment, there always might be an alternative context to ANYTHING said in a text communication environment. Sadly, from the tone of the other party, YHN believes that the chances for a future Socratic dialogue on the real nature of hatred remain unlikely. Still, YHN was delighted in the civil tone the discussion took even with an obviously hostile correspondent. Even after three years, Second Life astounds (and educates) me.
Your Hostess
Your Host
For a relic from ages past, HoboFro Bro Hotspur could could cute a rug. And speaking of rugs, what's with the hair?
Miss Cookie Bookmite demonstrates that white skates are for ladies...
Miss Eva wins the biggiest of big hair contest!
The decor was early 80s video arcade meets early 80s bad roller disco movie
Maybe you don't personally associate knife throwing with roller disco. And who would blame you? I just like to mix it up at parties I am involved in. It's not really a party without explosions or pointy sticks or at least a wheelbarrow race.
Standing next to Pac-Man is Mr. Logan Rizooto, and his lovely "bride". They won best Hobo Disco costume for a male. That rainbow-headed waif in the center next to YHN is Bonehead Goalpost.
Posts
