Debate over drilling and alternative energy sources in the United States

drill?

My position on the issue of drilling or not drilling is that, on balance, the United States should focus its efforts more on developing alternative energy resources. The reality is that the choice offered is not binary -- one can drill more and develop alternative energy resources. The two options are not mutually exclusive.

There are a number of perceptual blocks that could cause me to dismiss the opposing view, starting with the fact that I am right. Just kidding. But in all honesty, the first perceptual block is that I would naturally assume that everybody who has taken the time to study the issue, think both long and short-term, and think about the different issues (transportation, economy, national security) as I have, that they would come to the same conclusions. I would assume that if they come to a different conclusion, that they simply did not study the issue sufficiently or they perhaps they have a vested interest of some sort (like owning an oil company). Assumptions or stereotypes about people who hold opposing views, like that they are ignorant, biased, or otherwise have their thought processes tainted -- is one major perceptual block that would have to be overcome.

Another perceptual block is imagining boundaries. This is evident in the binary question -- state your opinion on the issue. This begs the reader to choose one option over the other, creating the illusion of mutual exclusivity that does not exist in the real world. Imagining boundaries is something of a shorthand in thinking, a tool used to simplify complex issues until they can be more easily understood or digested. For me to form an opinion requires me to ignore the fact that there are many complicating factors I know nothing about. That is a barrier to my understanding any opposing view. This relates to a third perceptual block, which is information overload. When there is too much information to process, the mind will make shortcuts, assuming things are not relevant when they are. When confronted with someone who understands that particular issue better, disagreement could result in the mutual defense of our opinions.

There are other blocks as well that contribute. Problem isolation is easy in a situation like this. The reality is that there are a lot of problems at work, and the answer may not resolve all of them. Failure to recognize a problem -- say worrying about energy needs and not national security -- is another block that can affect one's view.

The first step to overcoming perceptual blocks is to know that they exist, and that we all have them. When your blocks and biases are reflected back to you, it is easier to understand the thought processes that allowed you to come to your conclusion and not a different one. The second step is to begin to deliberately break down those blocks, forcing yourself to see and argue for other perspectives. This will provide not only more information, but the tools to see other sides of an issue. Your own views could change as the result of this process. The final step is to ensure that as much information has been gathered as possible, that is has been processed without bias and that the final conclusions have been reached through a rational examination of the issue(s) at play, the facts, the desired objectives, and in this case the policy prescription that best solves the issue(s) identified.