Today we're going to talk about heroes, and why we need to be careful about them.
Admiration is good, hero worship is not.
I've described to you what the genetic fallacy is, but for review, it's the fallacy that judges an idea based on where it came from, rather than its actual merits. We talked about an example of this yesterday, when I mentioned the bandwagon effect, and the hypothetical example of going on a juice cleanse because an instagram model liked it. That specific version of the genetic fallacy, where we believe something based solely on the fact that someone we admire believes it, is hero worship.
Hero worship causes problems in the belief acquisition process. Instead of appealing to an authority on a subject, we give our heroes authority on all subjects in our mind. We see this happen a lot, and we've seen it especially in the last decade or so here in America, with a lot people doggedly following their preferred politician, agreeing with them on every subject, fighting for their beliefs rather than one's own.
Hero worship acts as a broken version of a legitimate form of argument: an appeal to authority. An appeal to authority generally uses the expert opinion from someone who is an actual authority on the subject at hand as evidence for an argument. For instance, if Neil Gaiman, one of the best writers alive today (in my opinion), were to give a talk about storytelling, I would probably consider almost anything he said in there to be expert opinion, and at least somewhat convincing in an argument regarding storytelling.
Hero worship does the same thing, except it denies this basic fact: an expert in one thing is not necessarily an expert in anything else. We start with a simple belief that this person is an expert in something we care about, whether founded or unfounded, and then just let our minds run rampant with that. Really trust that politician? Then follow their random career advice! Think you've fallen for that actress? Spend your money on the products she recommends. That kind of thing. Don't do it.
Still, it's not bad to admire someone, even to aspire to be like them in some way. I deeply admire Neil Gaiman, as you may have already guessed, and some day I'd like to develop a more fluid and enjoyable writing style, like his. That being said, if Neil Gaiman gave me a suggest on who to vote for in regards to fiscal policy, I should probably only consider that about as useful as any random person saying it. Now, if a former secretary of the treasury department were to make such a recommendation, backing it up with analysis based on their time in the office, then that's something more like an expert opinion. It's important to know that those two people are two different people. I would gladly take Neil Gaiman's advice on writing, but I don't think I'm going to get good writing advice from an economist.
Our heroes should help us define who we are and who we want to be, but never should they be all that we are or want to be. Devoting yourself to becoming just like your hero denies one of the most valuable things about you: you're you. No one else can be you, and frankly, you can't really be anyone else. Be the best you that you can be, and decide carefully what that means to you, but don't try to be someone else. There's nothing wrong with looking up to a fitness expert, but don't try to have their exact body type. The same goes for a musician; learn from them, be inspired by them, but don't try to copy them. Every hero you have should be someone you admire for a reason, or multiple reasons, but you should also be willing to admit that person's faults. If you find you can't, you may need to reassess how you see them in relation to yourself.
TL;DR: it's okay to admire people, to let them inspire you, but don't let their existence consume you. You're important too.
That's all for today. As I've said before, if you're following along I'll "see" you in the next post, and have a great day. Goodbye!
No comments:
Post a Comment