Evolution, Creationism and ….the normalization of human error… Student: Berit Kjosnes Area: Sociology of Knowledge Master thesis, SOCM03, 15 credits Lund’s University, institution of sociology autumn 2012 Then He spoke a parable to them: “No one puts a piece from a new garment on an old one; otherwise the new makes a tear, and also the piece that was taken out of the new does not match the old. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine will burst the wineskins and be spilled, and the wineskins will be ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins, and both are preserved. And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately desires new; for he says, ‘The old is better.’ Luke 5:36-39 NKJV ABSTRACT The main aim of this thesis is to investigate how human errors become normalized so that a distorted perception of reality comes to represent the truth for a given group, field or other combination of people. With that, it also investigates whether it is possible for us to develop laws and implement regulations that aim to defend and secure human rights while, on a seemingly unconscious level, actively counteracting the very principles that the same laws and regulations rest upon. If this is possible, then how and why does it happen? Realizing that a distorted perception must be supported or generated by cognitive errors and that these errors are or can be visible, this scientist conducted a cognitive conceptualization analysis of the material of study, namely, document 11375, “The danger of creationism in education.” This was done by identifying and mapping the central concepts in the document and the meaning that they were given in this particular situation. The mapped material was then analyzed in order to identify, firstly, symptoms of dysfunctional decision making and then, cognitive errors, followed by a discussion in regard to the predicative value of cognitive errors. This research has established that distorted pictures of reality in the form of constructed truths can be accepted as constituting truth. In this case, a distorted pictures of reality did constitute truth, not just for one person but for the majority of the committee, the council, the national agencies who implemented the regulations, and lastly, for the schools who accepted them. In fact, it is likely that collective entities engage in cognitively erroneous thinking on a regular basis, and they see this as the regular way of doing things. This is possible because members of thought communities, whether at a national or supranational level, share core beliefs and implement schematas that need collective errors in order [for the schematas themselves] to exist” This study teaches us that it is possible to develop laws and implement regulations that aim to defend and secure human rights while, on an unconscious level, actively counteracting the very principles that the same laws and regulations rest upon. This can happen because core beliefs do not need single individuals in order to exist but can rest safely in collective communities in the form of thought collectives, and errors can become invisible. In the studied case, the likely influence, among others, is the focus on terrorism and on “who to trust” schematas. This research also confirms the usability of cognitive conceptualization analysis in that it can make the invisible become visible. Keywords: Cognitive Sociology, Schemata, Dogma, Creationism, Core Beliefs, Cognitive Errors. Index Key terms ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Aim of study ....................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Delimitations ...................................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTORTIONS AND BELIEFS ................................... 5 2.1 The two realities................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 The problem of experience .............................................................................................................. 7 2.3 How beliefs trigger error ................................................................................................................ 10 2.3.1 Understanding Core Beliefs ................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Where do we find distorted perceptions? .................................................................................... 12 2.5 The function of perception—A conclusion ................................................................................ 14 3.0 OUR CAPABILITY TO DEVELOP ERRONEOUS CONSTRUCTS ................................... 16 3.1 Cognitive errors ............................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 The particular nature of collective errors ..................................................................................... 17 3.2.1 The collective construction of a people ............................................................................... 17 3.2.2 Applying a filter on reality ...................................................................................................... 18 3.2.3 Unification of beliefs ............................................................................................................... 18 3.2.4 Symptoms of defective decision making .............................................................................. 19 3.3 The danger of errors ....................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.1 Developing a bad trend........................................................................................................... 19 3.3.2 Stuck in a dysfunctional pattern ............................................................................................ 20 3.3.3 Cognitive errors fuel anger ..................................................................................................... 20 3.4 How one justifies violence and persecution ................................................................................ 21 3.4.1 Transferring responsibility ...................................................................................................... 21 3.4.2 Violence for a good cause is not a crime.............................................................................. 21 3.4.3 No other options ..................................................................................................................... 22 3.4.4 Preventive measures ................................................................................................................ 22 3.4.5 Normalization of violent acts and prejudice ........................................................................ 22 3.5 The predicative value of errors ...................................................................................................... 23 3.5.1 Predicting prevalent core beliefs............................................................................................ 23 3.5.2 Predicting violence .................................................................................................................. 23 3.6 No exit? ............................................................................................................................................. 24 3.7 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 24 4.0 DOCUMENT 11375 .......................................................................................................................... 28 4.1 Introduction to document of study—Our mutual history ........................................................ 28 4.2 Introduction to document of study—Organizational features ................................................. 29 4.3 Introduction to document of study—Case history .................................................................... 30 4.4 Conceptualization in document 11375 ......................................................................................... 34 4.4.1 Which beliefs must be separated from science? .................................................................. 34 4.4.2 Science and its whereabouts ................................................................................................... 34 4.4.3 Evolution .................................................................................................................................. 36 4.4.4 Creationism ............................................................................................................................... 41 4.4.5 Danger, threats, attacks and finally war ................................................................................ 47 5.0 ANALYSIS and CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................