In social psychology, naïve realism is the human tendency to believe that we see the world around us objectively, and that people who disagree with us must be uninformed, irrational, or biased.
Good article here about Andy Clark’s book The Experience Machine which I read a few months ago.
Here’s another article with a related take that I came across the other day:
I loved the first link. Retirees get to read the best books. On board, most days I get 45 min of reading before I sleep when working 1 watch per day. At sea on the 4hr on, 8hr off, I get about the same or less per day. At home, way less while compensating for all work the misses does when I’m gone. I hope retirement is full of long hikes with good books. Thanks for the titles @Kennebec_Captain .
________________
From the first link:
"When the brain strongly predicts a certain sight, a sound, or a feeling, that prediction plays a role in shaping what we seem to see, hear, or feel.
Emotion, mood, and even planning are all based in predictions…"
I’m not sure I completely agree with your statement “an error because of expectation is a bias assumes a naive realism viewpoint”, but I may not be understanding your point. Are you saying that the person committing the expectation bias error has a naive realism viewpoint, or the person (or organization) attributing the error to bias has a naive realism viewpoint? At some point, there is no naivete at all about what is “real.” Using the Algoma Verity accident as an example, the presence of the shoal water that the ship ran up on was objectively real, no matter who was making that determination.
I enjoyed reading the articles. Regarding the second article, I suppose you could say that “optimal grip” is, in part, the ability to overcome biases. I would like to learn more about the “how” in overcoming biases and/or achieving optimal (or at least better) “grip.” But some might say that’s a lost cause…