Yu don eva wonda wai som pipol dey tink about di world beta, dem dey get confam and beta tin wey dem wan tok wey dey dia mind wey dem tink on topics wey kos wahala, pass odas? Yu eva tink about wich kin tinkin dey make pesin rison well and rish konklusions wey dem get pruv fo, and aw pesin fit avoid di problem wey konfamasion partiality and make pesin dey diciv im sef fit bring? For her book wey she koll “The Scout Mindset: Wai Som Pipol Dey Si Tins Klearly and Odas No Dey Si Tins Klearly” Julia Galef (wey bi di pesin wey dey do di tok show “Rationally Speaking” and co-fanda of di Center for Applied Rationality) try ansa dese kweshions. For di first part of dis essay, I go somarize Galef’s koret undastandin; for di sekond part, I go tok about di lesins wi as Kristian pipol wey sabi and pipol wey dey defend one bilif fit len from di book.
Smol gist about Di kain mind wey go si Wetin dey happun klearly and Tok am laik dat [scout mind].
Galef dey tok about two difrent mind wey she koll “soja mind” and “scout mind.” She tok sey soja mind, wey dem also dey koll jinja risinin, dey make pesin dey loyal to defend im bilifs no mata wetin happun. E dey min sey pesin go dey find evidence wey go sopot im bilifs, but e go leave or make excuse for evidence wey no sopot di bilifs. But di scout mind na wen pesin dey try find out aw di world rily bi – as Galef tok am, scout mind na “di jinja to si tins as dem truly bi, no bi as yu wan make dem bi.” Akodin to Galef, if pesin dey di soja mind, tinkin go bi like fite wey pesin no wan gree – “na like sey wi bi sojas, wi dey defend awa bilifs against evidence wey fit shake am.” For di soja, to shange pesin mind – to gree sey pesin bin dey rong – e go luk laik sey pesin don give up and fail, na sign of wiknes. Pesin loyalty dey to pesin precious bilifs pass di truth, even if dose bilifs no match wit di evidence wey dey ground. For di soja, to decide wetin to biliv, pesin go dey ask imself “I fit biliv dis?” or “I sopose biliv dis?”, based on pesin risin. For pesin wey dey di scout mind, tinkin fit bi like wen dem dey draw map, and if pesin find out sey im dey rong about one or more of im bilifs, e min sey pesin go shange or update im map. So, scouts dey more likely to search well and konsida data wey fit shake dia own bilifs (so dat dia map go show real life well), dem biliv sey e beta to lisin to pipol wey no gree wit dem pass dose wey dey tink like dem. Di plenti soja mind wey dey pipol-dem today show well, like Galef tok, based on one sirious study wey she mension. For di study, dem test pipol based on dia “science sense” wit som kweshions. Dem difid di kweshions into four part – simpu facts; methods; nomba tinkin; and dip tinkin. To awa soprise, wen dem ask republican wey dey kiaful and democrat pipol wey dey sopot equal rite weda dem gree sey if dem dey “solid evidence” sey hotness wey don rise recently for di whole world dey happun wella bikos of “human activity like burning of fuel wey dey kom from old tins wey don ton to stone,” dem si sey “science sense” dey tok to difrent tins. Na to tok sey, as pesin dey get beta science sense, na so liberal democrat dey more likely to gree wit di tok, while conservative republican dey more likely to no gree wit am. E no bi only dis study wey show sey as pipol dey get more educasion, dem go get difrent minds on topics wey dey kos argument. Anoda study ask pipol about dia views on topics wey dem get ogbonge mind about, like stem cell research, di Big Bang, human evolution, and climate shange. Dem find sey “Pipo wey get beta education, science education, and science knowledge dey get difrent bilifs on dese issues,” but dem no si “plenti evidence of political or religious difrence for mata of nanotechnology and genetically modified foods.” Galef explain di minin of dose studies like dis: “Dis risot dey very impotant bikos if pesin smart and get plenti knowledge for one patikula topic, e fit make pesin biliv sey im dey tink well. High IQ and beta degree fit give pesin advantage for tins wey no get strong bilif, like solving maths problem or make pesin sabi where to double yor monie. But e no go protect pesin from partial wen di mata dey touch strong bilif,” (p. 48). Even tho wi all get small scout and soja inside us, Galef dey argue sey “som pipol, for som kin mata, dey beta scouts pass most pipol,” dem dey “truly wan di truth, even if e no bi wetin dem dey hope for, and dem no go easily accept bad arguments just bikos dem dey okay. Dem get ogbonge jinja to go out, test wetin dem don si, and find out dia mistakes. Dem dey sabi sey dia undastandin of real life fit dey rong, and dem dey open to shange dia mind,” (pp. 14-15). For di oda side of di mata, many times wi dey use jinja risinin not bikos wi no sabi beta, but bikos wi dey try to protect tins wey dey very koko to us – awa ability to dey happy about awa life and awa sefs, awa jinja to dey try hard tins and no give up, awa ability to dey luk gud and convince pipol, and aw awa pipol-dem go accept us,” (p. 26). For exampu, if wi go tok truth, aw many times wi, wen wi dey konsida one klaim, “wi dey ask awa sefs inside awa mind, ‘Wich kin pesin go biliv dis klaim, and na so I wan make pipol si me?'” (p. 23). Dis kin of tinkin dey like soja mind. For real life, wi no fit pata-pata komot soja mind from awa way of tinkin. Afta all, na awa noma way of tinkin. Noma-noma, wi like make awa bilifs dey konfam. But wi fit make effort wey yu make wey yu sabi sey yu dey make am to allow more of a scout mind. Wetin bi som of di koko tins wey separate scout from soja mind? For chapter four, Galef tok about five tins wey define scout. Di first one na di ability to tell oda pipol wen yu si sey dem dey rite. Galef give one impotant point for dis quality by tok sey, “Technically, scout mind no nid make yu tell oda pipol sey yu dey rong, na just to yor sef. Still, if yu fit tok ‘I dey rong’ to anoda pesin, e show sey yu value truth pass yor own gra-gra.” Di sekond quality na to dey ansa wella to banta. Galef tok sey, “To sabi aw yu take handu banta, e no dey okay to just ask yor sef, ‘I dey open to banta?’ Insted, sheck yor sef. Yu don act based on any banta wey yu riciv? Yu don give pesin wey banta yu somtin bifor (for exampu, make yu promote am)? Yu dey make am easy for oda pipol to banta yu?” (p. 52). Di third quality wey show sey pesin dey tink like scout na di ability to show sey yu dey rong. Galef ask, “Yu fit rememba any exampu wey yu pruv yor sef rong? Maybe yu wan tok yor mind for social media, but yu risin sey make yu search for tok wey dey against yor own first, kom si sey dem make sense. Or for work, yu dey sopot one way, but shange yor mind afta yu kakulate well and si sey e no go work,” (p. 54). Di fourth tin wey show scout mind na to avoid partial for yor infomasion. “For exampu,” Galef rite, “wen yu ask yor padi to tok about one fite wey yu get wit yor wife, yu fit tell am about di mata make yu no tell am wich side yu dey, so yu no go influence yor padi ansa? Wen yu start one new project for work, yu don plan ahead of time wetin go bi success and wetin go bi failure, so yu no go fit shange yor mind lata?” (p. 56). Di fifth tin wey Galef tok na to sabi gud bantas. Galef tok sey, “E dey diciv pesin to si pipol wey dey banta yu as pipol wey no like yu, wey no get sense, or wey no dey risin wella. And e fit bi sey som of dem dey like dat. But e no fit bi sey all of dem dey like dat. Yu fit mension pipol wey dey banta yor bilifs, work, or even di choices wey yu make wey yu biliv sey dem tink well, even if yu biliv sey dem dey rong? Or yu fit give risin wai pesin fit no gree wit yu wey yu biliv sey dey okay (even if yu no sabi dose pipol wey get dose views)? (p. 57). In somary, Galef tok sey, “To fit mension banta wey dey okay, to dey ready to tok sey ‘Di oda side get point dis time,’ to dey ready to say wen yu dey rong – na tins like dis dey show sey pesin truly dey care about truth” (p. 57). Chapter 5 for di book get five tests wey fit show if wi dey tink wit ojoro. Di first test na double standard test, e min sey wi dey use di same standard for awa sefs like aw wi go use am for oda pipol. Di sekond test na outsider test, e dey find out aw yu go luk di same mata or data if yu no get pasona interest for di mata. Di third test na conformity test, e dey si aw much yor bilif truly bi yor own. Galef tok am like dis: “If I dey gree wit pesin wey get difrent bilif, I go do conformity test: Imagine sey dis pesin tell me sey e no dey hold di same bilif again. Shey I go still hold am? Shey I go dey okay to fite am for dia front?” (p. 66). Di fourth test na di selective skeptic test – “Imagine sey dis evidence sopot di oda side. Aw bilivable yu go find am den?” (p. 68). Di final test na di status quo bias test – “Imagine sey di way tins dey now no bi di noma way again. If yu get chance, yu go still choose am? If yu no go choose am, e show sey yor likin for di way tins dey na based on sey e don already dey so tey, no bi based on sey e get any special risin,” (p. 69). Anoda tin wey show sey pesin na scout, akodin to Galef, na di way e take handu tins wen e dey rong. Scouts, as Galef tok, “dey make smol shanges to dia bilifs as time dey go, so e dey easy for dem to gree wit sometin wey no gree wit dia bilifs,” (p. 144). For scouts, “dem si mistake as chance to sharpen dia skill to dey do tins well, so wen dem si sey ‘I bin rong,’ e bi like somtin wey get value, no bi just somtin wey dey pain dem,” (p. 144). Galef even tok sey make wi komot di whole “tok sey yu rong” mata and insted make wi dey tok about “updating”. Galef tok sey, “Updating na noma tin. No too sirious. E no bi like wen pesin dey tok sey e don sin.” Update dey make somtin beta or up-to-date without minin sey di foma one bin fail,” (p. 147). Galef tok sey make wi no si shanging awa mind as somtin wey dey ida dis or dat – insted, make wi si di world as “shades of grey,” and tink about shanging awa mind small-small like shift” (p. 140). Galef tok sey if wi dey tink about shangin awa bilifs like dis, “wen yu si evidence wey no gree wit yor bilif, e go feel difrent” bikos “evri smol shange wey yu make no go karry too much risk” (p. 140). For exampu, “if yu biliv sey wen pipol kom from one kontry go enta anoda kontry to kom stay or work gud for economy wit 80 percent chest, and one study show sey wen pipol kom from one kontry go enta anoda kontry to kom stay or work dey reduce salary, yu fit bring down yor chest for dat bilif go down to 70 percent” (p. 140). Galef tok sey wen wi dey try put awa sefs to difrent bilifs for arguments wey wi dey interested in, pipol dey make mistake to dey always “folo pipol wey dey first argue against us and di popular pipol for public and media wey dey represent di oda side well-well,” (p. 170). But as Galef tok, “Dose ones no too dey show beta risot. First of all, na wich kin pesin dey quick start argument? Na pesin wey like argue. (‘Dhis artiku wey yu share for Facebook na komplete nonsense – make I tish yu…’)” Di sekond tin na, wich kind pipol or media dey fit bi popular pipol of one idea? Na dem wey dey sopot dia own side and dey laf or make yeye of di oda side – na so yu bi,” (pp. 170-171). Insted, Galef tok sey, “To increase yor chance to len from tin wey yu no gree wit, yu sopose lisin to pipol wey dey make am easy for yu to dey open to dia arguments, e no hard.” Pipol wey yu like or respect, even if una no dey gree. Pipol wey una get somtin wey una dey gree on – like som tins wey una tink alike – even if una no dey gree for oda mata. Pipol wey yu si as sensible, wey sabi sey som tins fit get areas wey no sure and wey get koma, and dem dey argue wit gud mind,” (p. 171).
Lesins Wi Fit Si From Di Scout Mind
Aw much wi, as Kristian pipol wey gud and pipol wey dey tok Kristian bilif, dey get scout mindset? E dey happun wella sey arguments between bilivas and non-bilivas dey turn to kolture fite, na like “us against them” kin tin, and na wit strong head and disrespect wi dey take relate wit pipol wey no gree wit us. But if wi si pipol wey wi no dey gree wit not as awa enemies but as awa fellow workers for di journey to find beta undastandin of real life? Di pipol wey dey banta us dey impotant to point out any mistake for awa risinin wey wi no fit si. If wi komot eye for dem, wi dey put awa sefs for wahala. If wi dey lisin to wetin pipol wey no gree wit us dey tok, wi go fit build one beta undastandin and strong bilif. But wu wi dey luk out for as bantas of awa faith? Wi dey mostly lisin to pipol wey no sabi much about Kristianity and just dey tok anyhow, or wi dey search for di best bantas wey sabi well about awa faith, even if dem no too popula? Wi fit mension som of di pipol wey dey banta us as pipol wey dey tok true and dey tink well? Aw wi dey arrange awa sefs so wi fit dey di best pozision to sabi if wi dey rong, if wi truly dey rong? If wi dey rong about any of awa bilifs, wi fit truly tok sey wi value truth well-well and wi dey rily wan sabi? Aw awa ansas to all di foma kweshions take relate to dis last kweshion? Make wi try tok wetin apologetics bi so pipol go fit undastand am well-well, bikos many times, plenti pipol, inkludin Kristians, no dey rily sabi wetin e min. Som dey tink sey apologetics min sey pesin don already choose konklusion bifor dem start to luk into di mata. But dis na big mistake. Apologetics (pipol wey dey defend wetin pesin biliv) no bi di same tin as say pesin fit jus get any kain ansa fo search (open-ended search), but e dey happun based on top wetin wi don find out from di open-ended search, wen wi don gada all di infomasion wey wi nid and dey ready to tok awa own undastandin of di mata. So, even tho wi no dey use di word “apologetics” for dis kin mata, anytime wi publish science paper, wi dey do apologetics. Origin of Species wey Charles Darwin rite na exampu of apologetics bikos Darwin bin dey try sell im own idea of di tins wey im si for Galapagos islands. Som pipol dey tink sey apologists dey do like loya wey dey fite for criminal by any means. But di truth bi sey dem dey more like journalists wey dey search well and ripot di risots of fair and balanced research to di general public. To bi apologist for di gospel no bi smol work. Wi dey ask pipol to give demsef to Jesus Christ and give all dem life to serve am. E fit cost dem plenti, even dem life. Di siriousness of dis work dey toked by apostu Paul imsef. E tok sey if Jesus no rily rise from death, So, if resureshon no dey, dat min sey, evritin wey wi don tok about God, na lie, bikos wi sey E raiz Jesus from death wen e nor raiz am,” (1 Cor 15:15). Na wai wi nid to dey sirious for awa study and research as wi dey prish di gospel. Wi get work to sheck di facts and arguments from both sides of di debate to make sure sey di gospel na true. Wi also get work to tell dose wi dey share di gospel wit, to give dem komplete and koret infomasion about di mata. Plenti time I don si som apologists wey dey present arguments for Kristianity but dem no put koko facts wey fit reduce di pawa of dia argument. If yu wan si exampus of dis, check my recent tok wit Wesley Huff about arguments wey Kristians no sopose use. Anytime yu si argument wey sopot di pozision wey yu like, bifor yu kom dey ripit am for public, make sure sey yu search well to find any beta infomasion wey fit reduce di pawa of di argument. At least, yu sopose find out if any academic book or paper, like dose wey banta yor bilifs, don already tok about di argument. Dis na just one way wey fit hep yu reduce di bad effect of confamasion ojoro for yor tinkin. Wetin bi oda steps wey wi fit take to reduce dis confamasion ojoro? One step wey I dey take na to make sure sey I give myself to plenti materials – like books, ritins, tok shows, videos and oda media – wey dey argue against my bilifs pass di ones wey dey sopot am. Dis one reduce di chance wey I go dey diciv myself, and e make me tink well-well and kiaful about my bilifs. E also hep me get a beta undastandin and explanation of my bilifs. E fit also hep me well-well to find out sey I dey rong if I truly dey rong about any of my bilifs. One first step to waka komot from inside yor tinkin na to si sey smart pipol fit argue truly and still no gree wit yu. Somtimes pipol dey ask me aw dem fit sabi wich apologists to lisin to and wich ones to leave, ezpecially if dem new for riligious debates. E dey hard small for dis mata bikos to sabi wich apologists yu fit trust to give koret infomasion, yu go nid don already get smol knowledge about di mata. But to rish dat level of undastandin about di mata, yu go first nid sabi wu go fit give yu infomasion. Aw wi fit run komot from dis problem? One koko tin wey I dey always tok bi sey make yu dey kiaful of anybody wey tok sey all di evidence dey sopot only im own pasona view and sey none dey wey dey show sey im fit dey rong. Anytime pesin kom tell me, for any hard mata (weda na about God, Kristianity, evolution or any oda tin), sey all di evidence dey for im own side, e make me doubt im objectivity wit di data, and I begin to tink sey confamasion ojoro dey afet im risinin well well. E min sey yu dey show sense if yu fit gree sey som evidence fit show sey yor own bilif no dey koret. But no forget sey yu still biliv sey di evidence wey sopot yor bilif strong pass. But e still impotant to si sey hard or strange evidence still dey, so wi go sabi sey yu get scout mind. Aw wi go fit sabi if one patikula infomasion konfam or no konfam awa Kristian bilifs? Anytime wi si one infomasion, wi go ask awa sefs if wit di infomasion alone, e dey more likely sey di infomasion sopot Kristianity or sey di infomasion dey against am. If na di former, e min sey di infomasion konfam Kristianity; if na di lata, e min sey di infomasion dey against am. Many times I si pipol rison sey if dem fit arrange data to work wit dia bilifs, den dem don cancel di objection to dia bilifs. But dis way of tinkin no komplete. E fit always possibu to arrange data wey no match wit yor bilifs to still fit inside yor bilifs. But dat no min sey di data no sopot di possibility sey yor bilifs fit dey false pass sey dem fit dey true, or sey yu no sopose reduce yor confidence for dose bilifs. If yu si data wey no match wit yor bilifs, di koret kweshion no bi to ask yor sef “Shey I still biliv sey I dey rite?” As Galef tok true, most of di time, di ansa go dey “Yes, easily” (p. 141). Insted, wi sopose ask awa sefs aw much wi nid to update awa confidence for awa bilifs based on dis new data. Anoda way wi fit take sabi sey pesin dey true as apologist na if dem dey ready to banta arguments wey pipol for dia own side bring. Dem dey treat arguments for dia own view same way dem dey treat arguments wey pipol from di oda side bring? If dem fit do dis, e show sey dem dey wise and dem dey rily konsan about truth and koret tin. Aw pesin take respond to wen dem tok sey yu dey do somtin wey no koret, weda na pesin wey dey like yu tok am or pesin wey no like yu, na one way wey wi fit take sabi aw yu dey konsan about to tok true true. If yu fit tok sey yu do somtin wey no koret and yu fit shange am, e go show sey yu bi pesin wey pipol fit trust well well. If wi si pesin wey dey enta debate wey wi neva sabi bifor, and wi neva si dia work bifor, wi sopose check wetin dem dey tok well well. Wi sopose check weda wetin dem tok na true or na lie, ifwi fit,wi go even check di main place wey di infomasion kom to confam am especially if dem dey tok about somtin wey no bi awa own area. If dem dey always dey give koret infomasion and dey tell pipol well about di facts, e min sey wi fit trust dem as true otority. But if dem dey give rong infomasion, wi sopose dey kiaful and no just biliv evritin wey dem tok. Make wi shine awa eye well-well for apologists wey dey tok pass aw strong dia argument bi. Dem dey karry di data pass wetin e fit sopot. E beta make wi tok smol smol about di gud sides of awa argument and lata bring plenti evidence wey go shock pipol, insted of makin mouth too much and lata no fit diliva di evidence wey go back am up. Na wai for my writing and wen I dey tok for public, I like use statements wey sound more kiaful like “dis one fit show sey” or “dis one sogest sey” insted of strong statements like “dis one pruv” or “dis one demonstrate.” Likewise, I go tok sey I dey “confident” insted of “certain” about my konklusions. Somtimes, wen I dey tok strong about truthfulness and dip tinkin for apologetics, and wen I dey tok sey wi must check arguments for Kristianity well well like wi dey do for oda arguments, som pipol no dey undastand my risin – both pipol wey no biliv in God and Kristians – as sign sey I dey lose faith for Kristianity bikos of dis. But e no dey folo like dat at all, and to tell yu di truth, e dey make me sad sey pipol don begin si Kristian apologetics as soja insted of scouts. E klear sey pesin fit biliv sey Kristianity na true based on di evidence and still dey ready to present infomasion truly. E fit happun sey pesin biliv sey Kristianity get plenti sopot but still biliv say plenti of di arguments wey dem dey use to sopot am dey rong or dem dey tok too much. I biliv sey e beta well well if pesin sabi sey im mind fit dey do ojoro and im go make effort to reduce di bad efet wey fit dey on im tinkin. Di principles wey I don yan for dis essay dey impotant for apologists wey dey sopot any bilif, no mata aw strongly dem biliv for dat tin. If wi no folo dis principles, e fit dey easy for us to diciv awa sef, apply difrent rules for awa sef, select only di data wey sopot awa bilifs, and no dey open to find out sey wi fit dey rong for som of awa bilifs. Som pipol fit tok sey di principles wey I don tok for dis essay no make sense bikos if dem use rong infomasion or dey tok pass arguments, e fit make pipol biliv di gospel. Dem go tok sey di final risot na im bi di koko tin. I rememba wen I komplain for som times about how dem dey present false infomasion to defend Kristianity for one Kristian society wey dey konet to University for United Kingdom. Di ansa wey dem give me, sadly, na sey e dey very unlikely sey any oda pesin wey dey di meeting go sabi enof about di tori to sabi sey wetin dem dey tok no koret, so wi sopose dey happy sey dem hear di gospel. But dis tinkin no dey koret for two main risons. First, wi dey klaim sey wi dey represent di pesin wey koll imsef di truth (Jn 14:6). Plenti Baibul vases tok against way dem dey use diciv pipol (like Exod 20:16; Ps 24:3-5; 101:7; Prov 10:9; 11:3; 12:22; 24:28; Col 3:9; Eph 4:25). So, e no dey show respect to God wen wi dey spread rong infomasion, even if na to defend di gospel. Sekond, if pesin wey wi don share di gospel lata do im own research to check if wetin wi tok dey true, like di pipol for Berea wey dem praise for check Paul prishin (Acts 17:11), wi go dey responsibu to dey block dem way to hear di gospel. E fit bi big problem if na wi kos dat kin tin. Make I round up, if wi dey get scout mind well well and try low soja mind, e go hep us tink beta and get true sense about awa bilifs and wai wi biliv dem. I dey highly rekomend Julia Galef book wey she koll “Di Scout Mindset.” I go also tok say make yu sheck her TEDx Talks presentation wey she koll “Wai ‘scout mindset’ dey impotant for gud jogeement.”
