The recent attacks in Paris, I hope we can all agree, were tragic. As the friends and relatives of the victims continue to mourn, we turn on the news every morning to updates on the search for the suspected attackers. And, in the aftermath, social media fills up with opinions on the Syrian refugees immigrating to America in search of a better life and, more importantly, peace. Fear abounds as to whether potential terrorists will use the opportunity to enter the country and plot further attacks on our own soil.
Log in to Twitter or Instagram to find yourself inundated with fiery opinions and impassioned debates of commenters either siding for or against the 31 governors who have decided to not welcome Syrian refugees into their states. 58 comment responses later and nothing has been resolved. The end result: a lot of mud-slinging, anger-fueled rage, hot tempers, and little resolution. What we DON'T have is a significant amount of level-headed, clear minded, well reasoned discussion. How does this happen every time a new hot button issue arises? How do we not improve our ability to better resolve a discussion and not take the bait some attention seeking poster hangs out there in a Facebook rant? Why, after so many of these episodes, do we still constantly let our emotions impede our reasoning?
Well, one reason might be that social media provides a platform for this type of conversation - a back-and-forth exchange where one can take time to flesh out his argument, use a thesaurus to find a bigger, more complicated word, and dial up a Wikipedia article or two to find under-scrutinized pieces of information to back his side prior to hitting "reply". But the root of the problem goes deeper than that. We are pushed to partake in these disputes because of Confirmation Bias.