Did you ever overhear a conversation between two people discussing the ills our our society that went something like this?:
“Did you hear?”
“They want to raise the minimum wage again. Small business people are going to suffer and pass all the cost along to you and me!!”
“I know but people have to eat and right now you can’t make a living wage even if you have two minimum wage jobs.”
“They don’t have to work those minimum wage jobs. They are just to lazy to work hard and get something better. They have a choice don’t they? Besides look at how many kids they have and none of them with the same father! They are so irresponsible that they have kids they can’t afford and expect the rest of us to pick up the tab!”
“But, the deck is stack against most of these people. They are on the bottom rungs of the social ladder and the way our society works it is very difficult for many to even see a way out of the drudgery of their lives. It’s sad and depressing. As a society we need to do more to help those with the least among us.”
“No way! This is a matter of personal responsibility and accountability. There is no such thing as a free ride. These people simply make bad choices and are too lazy to earn a better living. They would rather sit around drinking, doing drugs and collecting!”
The conversation sounds pretty familiar doesn’t it? Most of us have taken either the blue or green side at one time or another in our lives. The speaker in blue tends to attribute the economic state of the poor to something in the character or traits of the poor person: they are lazy, irresponsible and make bad choices. The speaker in green tends to see the condition of the poor as a function less of their character and more of the social situation which oppresses them.
The person taking the blue position and attributing the condition of the poor to individual internal disposition or character trait is making what social psychologists call the fundamental attribution error; i.e., attributing too much weight to individual traits and character and not enough weight to the social situation in which people find themselves and, in this way, blaming the poor internal disposition of the poor for their being poor. We tend to reverse this process for the rich. In the end, many think, each category, rich and poor get what they deserve, more or less .
Individualistic cultures like the United States tend to make this error more readily that do more collectivist societies. Across the political spectrum, conservatives make the fundamental attribution error more readily than liberals while the most liberal among us may miss those aspects of social problems which are in fact grounded in the internal disposition of others.
On balance, at least in the West, we have had a significant tendency to blame the “have nots” for not having the internal disposition necessary for success and to laud the “haves” for their supposed strength of character and internal disposition in favor of hard work. Assistance to the poor and least advantaged among us is even argued to be an encouragement to further indulge the natural disposition to sloth and debauchery of the poor, while aid to rich, usually in the form of tax breaks, is thought to be providing additional resources to those with the moral character to make the best use of it.
Maintenance and even re-enforcement of the fundamental attribution error presents a major impediment to the resolution of complex social problems which only worsens as economic disparity increases. The rich will need more aid and the poor less, as we continue to tilt with the wrong enemy. As Bill Clinton might have said, “It’s not the people. It’s the situation, stupid.”
Notice that simply by adding the word “stupid” to the sentence above, I have committed the fundamental attribution error myself. It is way to easy and natural a sin to commit and should have be included in any list of deadly sins. Like any sin, this sin too must be repented of by creating a new mental situation in which we forgive ourselves our missteps, humble ourselves before the complexities of existence and open ourselves to a more profound realization of how each of our life situations, and the relationships we have in those situations, impact both who we are in any given moment and who we, as a people, will become in all the moments to come.