Try to get a grip on this one article: it is a book review
Don't know about you, dear readers, but I miss the step-by-step logic of proving a theorem in the science of geometry that usually ends with three initials QED Classic Latin 'Quod erat demonstrandum' That which was demonstrated [to be true]
The Rhetoric of Pop Psychology
Jesse Singal’s takedown of trendy science aimed at fixing human behavior in The Quick Fix reveals the limits of a certain strand of journalism.
Image Credit: A print by Carel Christiaan Antony Last (1808–1876) depicting fantastical creatures inflicting pain upon the head of a man.
(Photo by Universal History Archive / Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
QED first - ". . .Thus the book’s rhetorical failing: In attempting to neutrally assess the bullshit truisms permeating American society, Singal also ends up mistakenly asserting his own truism that we’re often guided by what feels like common sense but is really just the myopia of our own perspective.
There are too many instances where he glibly asserts something about how “we” live, or how society supposedly works, all of which only add up to a poorly observed portrait of the world around him, not any real set of dictums about “us.” As a writer or pundit, you are what you pay attention to, and with this book and his work elsewhere, Singal presents his fixations as dire problems to be solved. But his inability to charitably or accurately assess the interconnecting factors that have created all this bunk science cast him as another devotee of the Primeworld he bemoans, so concerned with calling out the bad actors that he misses the bigger picture. . ."
The author bemoans this in his second paragraph, [it's over a self-administered test at home with the results in 15 minutes)
". . .My own results have been lost to the maw of online history, so you’ll have to trust me that the test—which took about 15 minutes to complete—informed me that I did not appear to have any unconscious racial biases. . ."
OK. . .and in conclusion Underlining this is the dirty reality that many of these catchy studies, and their claims about the subtle forces supposedly conditioning our behavior, cannot be replicated on attempt, rendering them essentially useless. One meaty chapter dedicated to the replication crisis lays out the quality control rotting out the entire field of bombshell psychological studies, enabled by a news and academic infrastructure that prioritizes virality over facts. At the end he admits the problem is fixing itself, but there’s still value in navigating how we got here. His point is that concepts like the IAT aren’t just ineffective, but that reliance on them has also demonstrably led us astray, as better solutions—or even better ways of thinking about solutions—are ignored. In some of his cases, that’s clear, like when he lays out how the idea of the “super predator,” a violent underclass of (typically Black) youths, took hold in the 1990s because of shoddy science and racist logic, at the expense of an entire generation.
But for the most part, Singal struggles to connect his topics to any broader view about what’s wrong with society or its prevailing conventional wisdom.
Instead of offering a comprehensive critique, he often comes off as someone attempting to settle scores, while taking care to position himself as someone who really gets what’s going on—even as his suggestions for how we might “do better” can often strike a reader as naive.
That’s one thing if you’re arguing on Twitter, but it’s not nearly enough to sustain a text that groans and shudders under the weight of so much data without ever proving anything beyond “we’ve got problems, and there may be answers.”
WE'VE GOT PROBLEMS AND THERE MAY BE ANSWERS
You are invited to read more all in-between-the-lines > Jeremy Gordon August 31, 2021
