I Have an Unconscious Bias that Everyone is Biased
Hmmm…what to do with Pragya Agarwal’s Sway: Unraveling Unconscious Bias? (1)
At the risk of going in the categoric opposite direction that Jason recommended in our last cohort zoom gathering (that is, find one point and go deep), I am going to try and articulate why I find myself torn in several directions with this well-researched and readable book.
Before I do that, let me state the obvious: this book has numerous connections with our past readings (and I missed one full semester of the reading list!). Daniel Kahneman (2) is quoted by Agarwal in several different places as she dives into how our brain works—mirroring some of the content in Rare Leadership (3). Our propensity to make assumptions and get things wrong was the focus of several past books including Bobby Duffy’s, Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything (4). Finally, our tendency to put others or ourselves into groups is explored in Yascha Mounk’s, The Identity Trap (5) and the issue of race as a socially constructed reality is a significant part of Malik’s, Not So Black and White (6). There are more, but I don’t want to use up all my words demonstrating my book recall!
What I liked: A book addressing the ways we can become aware of and seek to adapt our behaviours to avoid unhealthy and hurtful prejudice, bias, and stereotyping is a book worth reading. As I read Agarwal’s book, I was challenged to assume less, be more curious, and examine ways my own biases are unfounded, unfair, or unhelpful.
What I was a Bit Frustrated With: As I understand it, Agarwal’s book essentially says, ‘people are inherently group-ish and our brains inevitably make unconscious assumptions that we are not even fully aware of (fast thinking), that can cause mistakes on our part and harm to others in the process’ (Fair summary of the opening chapters?). However, like Rare Leadership, I found her book to be lacking any kind of robust engagement in how we might change this brain process—beyond us simply being aware of it. While ‘admitting you have a problem’ is a great first step in every recovery program, I would have valued more suggestions in the book to move the readers further along in the journey of training our brains to react differently (admittedly, the author does also suggest greater exposure to people different than yourself as one tangible step towards understanding and reducing bias).
What I am Wrestling With: While I stated my appreciation for this book above—I also had some questions arise as I read through some of the sections on stereotypes, microaggressions, and intersectionality.
One primary question: Is it ever appropriate to make generalizations (or stereotypes) about another group of people? Let me give an example: If, during our church service on Mother’s Day (a day that we acknowledge the pain this day represents for those who would like to get pregnant and can’t, or those who have lost children, while positively affirming all women for the intergenerational relationships they invest in whether they are biologically-based or not)….if in that service we show a short video that celebrates moms and it mentions their ‘nurturing hearts for their children’…then a generalization has been made. This generalization is what Agarwal calls a ‘positive stereotype’ (7) that, in fact, can have a harmful effect on those moms who don’t feel as naturally nurturing as other moms. These positive stereotypes can be even more detrimental than negative stereotypes. Is the answer, therefore, to no longer use any form of generalization because there is inevitably an outlier within a group that will feel hurt by such a presentation? Or is it sufficient to acknowledge a generalization prior to it being made, and stating that the statement does not apply to all?
A second question: Agarwal acknowledges that the human species is group-oriented, but the general messaging of the book—at least how I read it—was that categorizing people into ‘groups’ is not ideal, and people are better served when viewed as unique individuals. If I am reading her correctly, I am not exactly sure how to reconcile her generally negative view of groups/stereotypes with the conversation on intersectionality, which seems to generalize and put people in fairly concrete (stereotyped) boxes. Must we first categorize people to determine if they are part of a “subordinate group identity”—or perhaps “multiple subordinate group identities” (8)—and then adjust our conduct accordingly? To what degree is this being sensitive to another person’s lived experience and in what ways is this simply another form of bias/assumption/stereotyping?
I need to do some further reading on intersectionality.
There is a third, hard to fully articulate, question about where responsibility lies as it relates to people’s response to other people, and how much responsibility resides with each person in an interchange when hurt is experienced…but I think that one will have to wait for another blog!
Overall, I found Agarwal’s book to be a worthwhile read—providing some good personal reflection and prompting some larger questions as to how this gets worked out in our culture in healthy and productive ways.
(1) Pragya Agarwal, Sway: Unravelling Unconscious Bias. 1st ed, (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2020).
(2) Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011).
(3) Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder, Rare Leadership: 4 Uncommon Habits for Increasing Trust, Joy, and Engagement in the People You Lead, (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2016).
(4) Bobby Duffy, Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything: A Theory of Human Misunderstanding, (New York: Basic Books, 2019).
(5) Yascha Mounk, The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time, (NY: Penguin Press, 2023).
(6) Kenan Malik, Not So Black and White: A History of Race from White Supremacy to Identity Politics, (New York, NY: C. Hurst & Co., 2023).
(7) Pragya Agarwal, Sway: Unravelling Unconscious Bias. 1st ed, (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2020), 131.
(8) Pragya Agarwal, Sway: Unravelling Unconscious Bias. 1st ed, (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2020), 116.
About the Author
Scott Dickie
4 responses to “I Have an Unconscious Bias that Everyone is Biased”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Scott,
Let me try again here. Hi Scott,
You wrote, “Is the answer, therefore, to no longer use any form of generalization because there is inevitably an outlier within a group that will feel hurt by such a presentation? Or is it sufficient to acknowledge a generalization prior to it being made, and stating that the statement does not apply to all?”
A great question. The sociological pendulum swings one way in Argarwal’s book.
For your consideration: Lawrence White, “Microaggressions: A Critique of the Research | Psychology Today,” Psychology Today, accessed March 15, 2024, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culture-conscious/201805/microaggressions-critique-the-research.
I applaud the fact that I have been “sensitized” to my unconscious biases. I shall in the future be more “feelingful” in my responses to others.
As the same time, I don’t want to held hostage to those with negative emotionality. Forgive, Make Amends, Reconciliation….MOVE ON!
Selah…
Hi, Scott,
As always, thanks for your critical thinking and ability to have me dig deeper. I found Sway to also be worth the read and a book that challenged me to be aware of my own biases. However, your post brought be back to Friedman’s “A Failure of Nerve” where reactive sabotage calls for well-differentiated leadership. If we continually see all stereotypical assessments as negative, could it breed a victim mentality across the board? Just thinking out loud.
You bring up some helpful questions for me to consider, especially around positive stereotypes and responsibility.
In a podcast I listened to with Agarwal, she said, (and I paraphrase) “It’s not the intention that matters but the outcome of the behavior/action.” I think she meant that even if you meant to be nice or positive or in general, a good person, but your actions are interpreted as racist or sexist, etc. then the interpretation is what matters, not the intention behind it.
I’m kind of struggling with that. On the one hand, I am guilty of having good intentions but making ignorant comments that probably made someone feel uncomfortable or even “othered.” I didn’t mean to do that. In an ideal world, that person could have then (hopefully kindly) pointed out my misstep and I could have learned something and done better the next time. However, I’ve also recently found myself in a situation where an older retired male pastor at my church continually treats me like I am the secretary for our lead pastor, an older male. I have told him, in kindness, that sometimes he says things that make me feel this way. I have even pointed out some of the things he has said to me that are sexist. He apologized to me and acted like he was truly going to try to do better. And then he continued to treat me this way. Honestly, I don’t think he can do better. I think he is who he is and he’s not going to change – mostly because of his age – not because he doesn’t want to do better. His intentions are probably good and yet the outcome of his behavior is really sexist and insulting to me and I’ve found myself not engaging with him as much as possible.
All that to say, what responsibility do we has human beings have to interpret intentions and behaviors in ways that assume the best about the other person vs. assuming the worst? What responsibility does the person of color or the woman or the woman who is a person of color (intersectionality) have to do the correcting of the person’s behavior? These are questions I am pondering because of your post.
Also, this comment was not supposed to be a comment ALL ABOUT ME! But, there you have it…good intentions…annoying behavior.