1
"Information Cocoon"
Something has happened recently that makes me wonder how some people can be so stubborn that they can't be convinced.
It took a while to study it, and today I will tell you my conclusion, which is:
The other person is right, I am wrong.
Trying to convince others is a disease, very stupid, and I really won't do it in the future.
Today's article, I will talk about why some people can not be convinced at all, to everyone who wants to convince others, a wake-up call, of course, I did not convince you of the meaning.
There are three concepts, and we start with the first one:
"Information Cocoon".
The information cocoon is a metaphor, which means that if you receive information, there are so many fixed sources of information, and over time, your views on things will be "locked", and your thinking is like a silkworm in a cocoon, locked in and unable to come out.
These sources of information determine what you see as "right" and what you see as "wrong", and you consciously or unconsciously ignore the truth, or make excuses for things that don't make sense.
I've known this concept for a long time and have often reminded myself.
For example, my reading volume in a year is still quite large, although I have not counted, dozens of new books of deep reading are always available, otherwise, I would not dare to add the "good books of the month" column in my own knowledge planet.
(By the way, the Knowledge Planet is online this Thursday, and everyone remembers to come to see it at 12 noon.
A good book a month, that year was 12.
Of course, usually there are more fragments to read, so I basically pay attention to several every month, even a dozen new public accounts, are thousands of words of an article, deep reading of that kind, while deleting some feelings have been "no nutrition".
Coupled with the usual business trip to meet customers, friends, ideas collide.
I am constantly looking for new sources of information to avoid unconsciously falling into an "information cocoon".
Falling into an information cocoon is terrible, you fall into the mud pit, you know to get up, you will not know when you fall into the information cocoon.
Of course, it can also be said that in fact, everyone is in the information cocoon.
It's just that someone is a little smaller, someone is a little older, why someone can "prejudge your prejudgment", because your cocoon is part of his cocoon.
Sometimes after pushing the article, some enthusiastic and kind fans will leave a message, saying that The grid is always too right, and the three views are good!
I'm certainly emotionally happy.
But I can't encourage you to do this with a clear conscience, on the contrary, I remind you to be careful, read more of the author's point of view, and don't let me be part of your "information cocoon", so that I will feel very guilty.
In particular, you would like to be able to question my statement.
Your point of view is more reasonable and more perfect than mine, so I applaud you, except, of course, for the lifting of the bar.
2
"Functional illiteracy"
Next comes the second concept, "functional illiteracy."
Watch the video first.
Declaration of Uncertainty, 95,000 likes
These three people are Liang Wentao, Dou Wentao, and a classmate I don't know, I know the trouble message to inform you.
What is "functional illiteracy"?
It is that all the information that a person is "willing" to absorb is to confirm the view that he has "already possessed" before.
It seems that he can read, read, and even have a high degree, but he can no longer accept new things, so it is called "functional" illiteracy.
Let me give you an example.
When I was in graduate school, there was a big class with several classes together, the name was forgotten, probably philosophy and logic, and the teacher of one class gave a point of view on how to describe things accurately and unmistakably.
Like what:
When you smell a gas leak at home, you can't say, "I smelled a gas leak," but only "I smelled a smell, very much like a gas leak."
Why?
Because there is more than one gas that tastes the same as gas, how do you know that what you smell must be gas? Right, it has to be precise.
It's just that usually in order to facilitate communication, we usually say the smell of coal directly, but you must know that it is not rigorous and precise.
(In fact, the gas itself has no odor, and in order to prevent poisoning, a small amount of other odorous gases are deliberately mixed in))
The students in the audience began to exchange heads and ears, which may feel very fresh.
The teacher went on to say:
Well, when you see your mother on the road, you can't say, "I saw my mother," but you can only say, "I saw a person coming towards me, exactly like my mother."
Right, what if it wasn't your mom but her long-lost twin sister/sister? What if it's transfiguration in martial arts novels? (It can be said that medical beauty can be said now)
Although the probability is almost zero, this is called "precision".
The following classmates are about to collapse.
The teacher went on to say, so many of the doctrines we have developed can only be said to be conjectures, or speculations, and you can choose to believe, but you must leave a hole in your "belief", that is, it may also be wrong, for example, like "evolution" is a conjecture...
In the classroom of several hundred people, a classmate stood up:
Teacher, if even the theory of evolution can not be established, then how to explain the birth of human beings, sorry, I can't accept what you said!
It's been more than a decade since this happened.
In a graduate school of a certain major at a 985 university, there was a student who never accepted that "evolution" was just a conjecture.
You see, although the diploma is high, it is still "functional illiteracy".
3
"Keatings Index"
I don't know what this classmate thinks about evolution now.
If he still holds his point, then I would say that he is no different from those who made fun of Darwin with monkeys when "On the Origin of Species" was published more than 100 years ago.
"Functional illiteracy" can explain a lot of things.
For example, telecommunications fraud in which your family has to transfer money, such as your friend's infatuation with a certain unscrupulous star... People who insist on their own views simply cannot listen to the advice of others.
They will always look for evidence and reasons that support their views to confirm what they have already decided.
Reasons of doubt, they turn a blind eye.
Then we continue to ask, why is there "functional illiteracy"?
Why is it that the older a person is, the less likely he is to change his or her own ideas? Is it really because they are stupid?
Finally, I found the answer from a mathematician called the "Keatings Index," which is the third concept I'm going to talk about.
Mathematician Keatings argues that:
When you're going to make a new decision, or have a new attempt, the value of that attempt has to do with how much time you have left.
Let me give you an example.
The state stipulates a retirement age of 60 years old, if Lao Zhang is 59 years old and intends to retire after a year, at this time he encounters a very good job opportunity, should he jump ship?
As we all know, the answer, of course, is no.
It's not because you're old and timid, you don't have the spirit of adventure, it's not necessary at all, and it's a very good job. With just one year left, there's no point in job hopping, right, besides, what if the new job isn't that good?
Let's take a look at what happens if Xiao Zhang is only 25 years old.
Naturally, he jumped ship, because of this good job, he may work for 30 years.
This is Keatings's point of view, but Kittins also gave a set of algorithms, according to the remaining years, accurately calculate a value, to determine "whether to try something new", this algorithm is called "Keatings index".
This index is more complex, so I will not introduce it here.
Just remember that the younger you are, the more valuable it is to try something new.
The older you get, the more conservative you get, not because of stupidity, but precisely because of cleverness, because risk-taking is no longer cost-effective.
4
Now we can answer the question, why is it that the older a person is, the less likely he is to change his or her own ideas?
From the point of view of "functional illiteracy", it is because of stupidity.
But from the "Keatins index", it is precisely because they are very smart.
A person has been exposed to many ideas when he is young, and when he is old, he chooses to believe in one of them, and then stays in the "information cocoon" and never comes out again, both safely and comfortably for the rest of his life, you see, how good.
Not only is changing ideas painful, but what if a new one is also wrong?
In this way, it is clear to understand the telecommunications scams that your family has to transfer money, and to understand your friend's fascination with unscrupulous stars.
They choose to live in "their own world," not because they are right, but because they are comfortable.
Truth is often cruel, too cruel to accept.
Maybe you have to ask, General Manager, some very stubborn, obviously young people, how to explain this?
That's a great question, and it gets to the point.
Remember the example of 59-year-old Zhang just now.
Please note that 60 is the retirement age, not the age at the end of his life, which means that after the age of 60, Lao Zhang, although still alive, is no longer working.
Not working after the age of 60, it was his "choice".
So when Keatings says, "The value of trying has to do with how much time you have left," the time left is not how long you can live, but how long you "choose" to keep the idea in your head.
People who enthusiastically support an idea at a young age are because he has made up his mind to start with it from one thing to another.
Although he obviously has time to reflect and contrast.
There is no way, it is safe and comfortable to do so.
Retirement time is state-enforced, but whether or not to close the window for new ideas is within your control.
From this point of view, they are only biologically young, and as for the mind, they have reached the "retirement age".
There are many such people, when they get together and find that they are the same kind of people, they will be more determined to think about themselves, AB influence C, ABC influence D, ABCD affect other people...
5
Well, today we will finish talking about the three concepts of "information cocoon", "functional illiteracy", and "Keatings index".
Explains why a person can be so stubborn, and often the older the more stubborn.
At the end of the writing, I feel that those who insist on concepts, never change, and even have a trace of doubt and do not open their mouths at all are smart people and understand people.
People know how to think is the safest, the least painful.
As long as you are steadfast in your own ideas, only pleasure when you preach your views, and only feel cool when you scold the opposing camp, you are a smart person.
Who wants to remind them a little more of a "questioning spirit", hehe, you deserve to be scolded?
It was superficial, and the clown was me.
I have to say, don't do this stupid thing in the future.