My point turns out to be relatively straightforward: may be you and I don’t need more information. And, if we think that the key to navigating uncertainty and mitigating anxiety is simply more information, then we are probably going to make matters worse for ourselves.
“when confronted with consequential and often morally fraught decisions, we find ourselves tempted to operate just we would if we were deciding which brand of refrigerator we ought to buy.”
[First: hello! long time reader, first time commenter. I really enjoy your work - and thank you especially for making it available in podcast form.]
On the line of reasoning of "Believing that everything will be better if only we gather more information," I think there is also a strong social component that should be considered as a motivating factor. It goes like this: *If* information exists that might improve some given situation, and you have not availed yourself of it, then the fault lies with you, out of sheer neglect. This creates anxiety (and, by extension, social pressure that reinforces that anxiety) to understand all options and variables that might allow one more control over the situation.
An example that many people have witnessed close-up is parenting (particularly from pregnancy to earlier years). There is extreme anxiety not just for the general welfare of the child (along the lines of "good-enough parenting," to use Winnicott's term), but to produce the most optimal, flaw-free environment for child-rearing. Failure to know about (and adapt to) every conceivable factor is often met with overt criticism and social shaming.
The same applies, in my experience, to endless information consumption around the pandemic. As you point out, our days have been transformed into "complex actuarial decision making" (wonderful phrase!), which is heightened by the social pressure. It's not enough to get *a* vaccine, you should get Pfizer since it's 96% effective rather than Moderna's 95% effective vaccine. Are you sure your KN95 mask is legitimate? Did you read the report in the Times on counterfeit masks? etc. There is no "good-enough pandemic-ing."
I also believe that there is a strong class component to this imperative to control, manage, and master (at least in the US). This may be one where there is already data available; I have not (yet) checked.
I have not (yet) read Harmut Rosa's book on uncontrollability; I would be interested in seeing if he addresses social and class dimensions in that work.
Really appreciated your argument. I don't think we talk about friendship that much in American society? Something I noticed of my parents, and other older people, and now I notice this with my peers, is that it seems that friendships fall away. People move apart for jobs. Nuclear families and the work of raising economically competitive children, take up so much time, there isn't much left for friendship. One's partner is often described as a "best friend," but perhaps as a replacement for lost, non-romantic, best friends. Makes me think about coming to age movies like the recent Book Smart and the older Superbad, where best friends deal with having to break up due to attending different colleges. The movies show deep friendships that seem really important, but ultimately, the friends accept that they have to go their separate ways. It's the personally responsible thing to do or just unavoidable.
But your point about needing to move forward in uncertainty with companions is powerful. No amount of information and can remove the need to bear the uncertainty of life together with other people.
I've been working on a conference paper proposal on a similar topic. I'm thinking about how we frame issues of social justice within technical language. This framing that calls for even better "best practices" or more predictively reliable interventions in order to build a more just society. I am suspicious of these approaches, because they seem to leave everything as it is. I think my suspicion of this technocratic approach is similar to your concern about the claimed need for more information. Instead, I keep asking, "Who do we need to become in order to build a more just society? How do we have to change?" Seems like a more morally charged approach.
“when confronted with consequential and often morally fraught decisions, we find ourselves tempted to operate just we would if we were deciding which brand of refrigerator we ought to buy.”
🙏👍😂
[First: hello! long time reader, first time commenter. I really enjoy your work - and thank you especially for making it available in podcast form.]
On the line of reasoning of "Believing that everything will be better if only we gather more information," I think there is also a strong social component that should be considered as a motivating factor. It goes like this: *If* information exists that might improve some given situation, and you have not availed yourself of it, then the fault lies with you, out of sheer neglect. This creates anxiety (and, by extension, social pressure that reinforces that anxiety) to understand all options and variables that might allow one more control over the situation.
An example that many people have witnessed close-up is parenting (particularly from pregnancy to earlier years). There is extreme anxiety not just for the general welfare of the child (along the lines of "good-enough parenting," to use Winnicott's term), but to produce the most optimal, flaw-free environment for child-rearing. Failure to know about (and adapt to) every conceivable factor is often met with overt criticism and social shaming.
The same applies, in my experience, to endless information consumption around the pandemic. As you point out, our days have been transformed into "complex actuarial decision making" (wonderful phrase!), which is heightened by the social pressure. It's not enough to get *a* vaccine, you should get Pfizer since it's 96% effective rather than Moderna's 95% effective vaccine. Are you sure your KN95 mask is legitimate? Did you read the report in the Times on counterfeit masks? etc. There is no "good-enough pandemic-ing."
I also believe that there is a strong class component to this imperative to control, manage, and master (at least in the US). This may be one where there is already data available; I have not (yet) checked.
I have not (yet) read Harmut Rosa's book on uncontrollability; I would be interested in seeing if he addresses social and class dimensions in that work.
Really appreciated your argument. I don't think we talk about friendship that much in American society? Something I noticed of my parents, and other older people, and now I notice this with my peers, is that it seems that friendships fall away. People move apart for jobs. Nuclear families and the work of raising economically competitive children, take up so much time, there isn't much left for friendship. One's partner is often described as a "best friend," but perhaps as a replacement for lost, non-romantic, best friends. Makes me think about coming to age movies like the recent Book Smart and the older Superbad, where best friends deal with having to break up due to attending different colleges. The movies show deep friendships that seem really important, but ultimately, the friends accept that they have to go their separate ways. It's the personally responsible thing to do or just unavoidable.
But your point about needing to move forward in uncertainty with companions is powerful. No amount of information and can remove the need to bear the uncertainty of life together with other people.
I've been working on a conference paper proposal on a similar topic. I'm thinking about how we frame issues of social justice within technical language. This framing that calls for even better "best practices" or more predictively reliable interventions in order to build a more just society. I am suspicious of these approaches, because they seem to leave everything as it is. I think my suspicion of this technocratic approach is similar to your concern about the claimed need for more information. Instead, I keep asking, "Who do we need to become in order to build a more just society? How do we have to change?" Seems like a more morally charged approach.