OPINION:FIRST CAME the atrocity, then came the vanity. The atrocity is what former coach Jerry Sandusky has been accused of doing at Penn State University (the alleged molestation of children).
The vanity is the outraged reaction of a zillion commentators over the past week, whose indignation is based on the assumption that if they had been in now-fired head football coach Joe Paterno’s shoes, or assistant coach Mike McQueary’s shoes, they would have behaved better. They would have stopped any sexual assaults.
Unfortunately, none of us can safely make that assumption. Over the course of history – during the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide or the street beatings that happen in American neighbourhoods – the same pattern has emerged. Many people do not intervene. Very often they see but they don’t see.
Some people simply can’t process the horror in front of them. Some people suffer from what the psychologists call normalcy bias. When they find themselves in some unsettling circumstance, they shut down and pretend everything is normal.
Some people suffer from motivated blindness; they don’t see what is not in their interest to see. Some people don’t look at the things that make them uncomfortable. In one experiment, people were shown pictures, some of which contained sexual imagery. Machines tracked their eye movements. The people who were uncomfortable with sex never let their eyes dart over to the uncomfortable parts.
Even in cases where people consciously register some offence, they still often don’t intervene. In research done at Penn State and published in 1999, students were asked if they would make a stink if someone made a sexist remark in their presence. Half said yes. When researchers arranged it, only 16 per cent protested.
So many people do nothing while witnessing ongoing crimes, psychologists have a name for it: the bystander effect. The more people are around to witness the crime, the less likely they are to intervene. Online you can find videos of savage beatings, with dozens of people watching blandly. Ilan Halimi, a French Jew, was tortured for 24 days by 20 Moroccan kidnappers, with the full knowledge of neighbours. Nobody did anything, and Halimi eventually was murdered.
People are really good at self-deception. We attend to the facts we like and suppress the ones we don't. We inflate our own virtues and predict we will behave more nobly than we actually do. As Max H Bazerman and Ann E Tenbrunsel write in their book, Blind Spots, "When it comes time to make a decision, our thoughts are dominated by thoughts of how we wantto behave; thoughts of how we shouldbehave disappear."
In centuries past, people built moral systems that acknowledged this weakness. These systems emphasised our sinfulness. They reminded people of the evil within themselves. Life was seen as an inner struggle against the selfish forces inside. These vocabularies made people aware of how their weaknesses manifested themselves. These systems gave people categories with which to process savagery and scripts to follow when they confronted it.
Now we live in a society oriented around our inner wonderfulness. So when something atrocious happens, people look for some artificial, outside force that must have caused it. People look for laws that can be changed so it never happens again.
Everyone gets to proudly ask: “How could they have let this happen?” The proper question is: “How can we ourselves overcome our natural tendency to evade and self-deceive?” That was the proper question after Abu Ghraib, Bernie Madoff, the Wall Street follies and other scandals.
But it's a question this society has a hard time asking because the most seductive evasion is the one that leads us to deny the underside of our own nature. – ( New York Times)