Why do we create meaning when there isn’t any? What drives us to interpret random events as meaningful coincidences?
In You Are Not So Smart, David McRaney reveals how our minds fabricate explanations when we don’t understand something. He explores three common thought errors that lead us to create false meanings: attributing events to fate, making up evidence, and self-justifying our actions and feelings.
Keep reading to discover how these mental shortcuts affect your decision-making and learn practical ways to think more rationally.
What We Do When We Don’t Understand
McRaney argues that, most of the time, the reasons and meanings we ascribe to actions, events, and feelings aren’t real; we make them up to avoid ambiguity and the unknown when we don’t understand or know something. This can cause you to make faulty judgments and decisions and undermine your critical thinking skills. We’ll explore three common thought errors associated with this phenomenon so you can recognize when you’re making up meaning and use facts to make more rational judgments and decisions instead.
Thought Error 1: You Blame It on Fate
First, McRaney explains we commonly interpret random events by choosing to believe there’s a deeper meaning behind them—we attribute them to fate. This can be seen in psychological phenomena such as the Texas sharpshooter fallacy, where we prefer to see events as meaningful instead of random. For example, if it rains on your wedding day, you might interpret it as a sign you and your partner will be together forever. It can also be seen in apophenia, where we prefer to see events as miraculous rather than coincidental. For example, you miss your plane but meet a new friend while you’re waiting for the next one—you might think this was meant to be.
Realistically, the events in these examples are completely random, but you choose to assign reason to them for two main reasons: 1) Our brains are wired to look for patterns, and 2) we like narratives where characters overcome hardships—missing the plane wasn’t so bad if you got a new friend out of it.
McRaney explains that this phenomenon has good and bad outcomes. Believing in fate is good when it helps you overcome hardships; however, it can be bad when you use it as a basis for making poor choices. For example, you find out a week after your wedding that your spouse has been cheating on you, but because it rained on your wedding day, you tell yourself your marriage must be destined to last, so you stay with them. In reality, the rain has nothing to do with your happiness and your spouse will likely continue cheating—so the better decision is to move on and find happiness with someone who respects you. McRaney recommends overcoming this faulty thinking by recognizing when you’re making up meaning and basing your perceptions on facts instead.
Thought Error 2: You Make Up Evidence
Another way we make up meaning, says McRaney, is by theorizing why certain events happen when we don’t know the whole story. We base our theories on our feelings and the information we do know. This can be seen in psychological phenomena such as the argument from ignorance, where we’re likely to accept a strange explanation for unexplained phenomena if there’s nothing disproving it. For example, you hear whispers at night and believe it’s fairies because you can’t come up with a better explanation. This can also be seen in the just-world fallacy, where we assume that people naturally get what they deserve—so a neighbor who gets robbed must have done something to deserve it.
(Shortform note: Cognitive dissonance theory, which posits that we crave consistency between our beliefs and experiences, explains why we might believe strange explanations and rationalize unjust outcomes: We want to experience our world in a way that aligns with our beliefs and expectations. When our beliefs are threatened, cognitive dissonance influences us to alter our perceptions of reality to preserve these beliefs and avoid discomfort. For example, your belief about your safety isn’t threatened if your neighbors were robbed because they had it coming, not because of random chance, and if the sounds in your house are from mice, not robbers.)
McRaney says that, while your guesses may occasionally be accurate, making assumptions can cause you to believe falsehoods and lead to misunderstandings and arguments. For example, believing the whispers you hear at night are from fairies would be ignorant, especially if there’s actually a stranger in your house. Further, believing your neighbor deserved to be robbed would be highly insensitive and could create tension if they heard what you thought. As with other phenomena, McRaney recommends increasing self-awareness to overcome this thought error.
(Shortform note: Just as McRaney does, experts argue that assumptions can be both helpful and dangerous. However, they offer a more nuanced perspective: Rather than avoiding making assumptions, you must learn to manage them—distinguish useful insight from unhelpful judgments. To do so, question your assumptions and do research before arriving at a conclusion. For example, before you assume your neighbor deserved to be robbed, do some research—maybe robberies are just common in your area. Likewise, instead of assuming you’re hearing fairies in your house at night, question whether fairies are real or whether there’s another logical explanation, such as mice scurrying in your walls.)
Thought Error 3: You Self-Justify
According to McRaney, we also commonly make up reasons to justify our actions, thoughts, and feelings. This can be seen in psychological phenomena such as confabulation, where we’re ignorant of the fact we’re misremembering. For example, you might believe you don’t like ice cream because you have a false memory of it making you feel sick when you were a kid. It’s also common with introspection, the illusion that we have insight into the origins of our thoughts, feelings, and actions. For example, you might think you feel irritable today because your favorite shirt wasn’t clean this morning, but the truth is that you just woke up in a bad mood.
In these examples, neither explanation is the definite root cause of its respective outcome, but you choose to believe it is to justify aspects of your reality (your food preferences and foul mood).
While self-justification doesn’t seem harmful, McRaney explains that it’s detrimental to your self-perception and growth. When you’re constantly making up mostly false justifications for your characteristics, preferences, feelings, and so on, you create a false narrative of who you are and become detached from your true identity. Further, you may close yourself off to opportunities for growth and self-development. For example, you tell yourself you’re irritable because your favorite shirt wasn’t clean, so you use this as an excuse to continue your bad attitude rather than trying to cheer up. Or, you tell yourself you hate ice cream because you hated it as a kid—but maybe you would enjoy it if you tried it today.
