"We find patterns and "clusters" in random data."
This cognitive bias helps us manage risk and process low-information environments.
We are masters at pattern recognition. We need to be. Research is an inconclusive process; we have to reach a point where we say "enough" and do what needs to be done. Most learning is done in motion anyway.
We live and die by patterns because they often correlate to real opportunities and threats.
But how do we know if the patterns we perceive really match what's there?
Perfect knowledge is prohibitively expensive. Without it we have no certainty. Waiting for certainty is a form of suicide. The best we can do is learn enough to be pretty sure.
The modern world has more randomness than existed before -- at least, it is more prominent. Our pattern-recognition wiring is still here and still the ideal solution for 99.9% of life. How are we supposed to know when to turn it off? That itself requires perfect knowledge.
The least risky solution is to look for patterns whether or not they exist.
Be aware of this bias' existence. It will sometimes trip us up. Don't feel bad about it though; most of the time it is the right tool for the job.
Comments
Post a Comment