
Whammo! You didn’t see that coming, did you?
Why is it that, despite all our planning, we sometimes get caught by surprise, totally unprepared, with our pants down as it were? I mean, we’re smart folks, right? How come sometimes we just don’t see stuff coming?
The answer is, much of the time, that we don’t see everything clearly because we don’t see a lot of things at all. We process the raw stuff of experience through a variety of filters – and we act on the “processed” information, not the world as it is.
Those filters are engrained in us, often from birth, and most of the time they help us to effectively function in our social and physical environments. For example, one very simple filter we have is how to isolate something interesting or important from a cluttered background – think finding your keys among the mess at the bottom of your purse. Or identifying something good to eat – a ripe fruit, perhaps – among the unripe fruits, leaves, and branches of a tree.
That’s a pretty basic filtering ability (though the physiological mechanisms involved are quite complex) that humans everywhere rely on every day to survive, so it’s a good thing. But there are many much more complex filters that we pick up as part of our thinking repertoire, and as helpful as they might sometimes be, they can also get us into a lot of trouble.
Here are some examples:
Language
Language is a powerful force in shaping our behavior. Just ask a sanitation engineer! Employers have long recognized the way that job titles can affect employee performance – which is why there are so few clerks and so many associates at your local retail mega-outlet.
But language can lead us astray, as well. Consider this example drawn from the annals of linguistics: a tanning factory discharges wastes, mostly animal matter, into a pond. The decomposing waste creates flammable gasses. A “pond”, though, is not flammable, right? I mean, right?! A man is working near the pond. Not taking any special precautions – why would you, next to a “pond”? – he ignites a blow-torch. A sheet of flame engulfs the pond and spreads to the nearby factory, destroying it.
The language we use to describe people can strongly influence our behavior towards them. Feminists recognized this when they started insisting on terms like “police officer” rather than “policeman”. Or consider this: numerous studies have shown that people with “ethnic-sounding” names are less likely to get job interviews as similarly-qualified people with “white-sounding” names.
Gender
Gender is a powerful filter in every culture – although the behaviors it shapes can be very different from culture to culture. What is considered men’s work in one society – carrying heavy loads of bricks, for example – might be considered women’s work in another.
Gender leads us astray when it leads us to look at a person’s gender as an index of their abilities. For instance, in the US, it is common to hear people say things like “men are stronger than women”. This is not true. Some men are stronger than most women, a handful of men are stronger than all women, and most men are stronger than some women. But knowing someone’s gender does not tell you anything about how strong they are!
Assumptions about gender extend far beyond physical attributes. With few exceptions, women still are not promoted to top-level corporate positions, despite the number of qualified women in the business world. Men are assumed to have “leadership qualities” that women lack – and women’s leadership qualities tend to be dismissed as signs of “manliness” or “bitchiness”.
Race and Ethnicity
What is true of gender is also true of race and ethnicity. Knowing someone’s race or ethnicity tells us little about that particular person – yet we act as if it told us a lot. Here’s an example: a black student of mine was accused of plagiarism in another class when she handed in an excellent essay. This is a student that added immensely to every classroom discussion she took part in, and who wrote insightfully in every assignment she gave me (including “personal reflection” papers that cannot be plagiarized). The other professor did not have any examples of work that the student had allegedly copied from; it was simply “too good”. Race may not have been the only factor, but it was clearly a factor; I’ve never had a white student of similar quality face a similar accusation.
Here’s another example: Black and other minority athletes, performers, even military leaders and politicians are often described as “articulate”, an adjective rarely applied to their white counterparts. People do not expect articulate speech from non-white persons, and are surprised when they hear intelligent dialogue from black speakers.
Personal Experience
An old joke claims, “All Indians walk single file. At least, the one I saw did.”
Personal experience is a powerful learning tool, but it can lead us astray when we make false assumptions based on generalizations from limited experience. Childhood experience can make for especially powerful filters, as they tend to be imbued with strong emotional resonance, but any experience can lead us to wrong conclusions.
Examining Your Filters
What is insidious about all of these factors is that most of the time they function without us even noticing them. We don’t promote Chad over Wilma because Chad’s a man, but because he seems more “leaderly”, because he has that “certain something”. And maybe he does – or maybe our invisible assumptions about gender make weak signs of “certain somethingness” seem strong, while Wilma’s powerful “certain somethingness” is filtered out.
It’s unlikely that you will catch your filters at work in your day-to-day life, but you can reflect on the way you have interacted with other people and how you’ve handled various situations (perhaps in a weekly review?). You may well be surprised to find that, in many cases, you can’t seem to put your finger on exactly why you acted the way you did – a sure sign of a filter at work. Paying attention to those moments will bring you a long way towards replacing the stock of experience and received wisdom with filters that allow you to more accurately and effectively act.
I’ve listed only a handful of obvious filters here. What are your filters? How could you deal with them?







In my world, geography (which part of the country someone is from) and education (where someone went to school and what degree they have) would be two biggies. I thought it was interesting that you don’t use the word ‘stereotype’ anywhere here. ‘Filter’ is certainly a nicer way to put it but I thought it was also ironic because those words themselves carry connotations that affect how we perceive what they mean.
Functionally, it’s all language. Kenneth Burke talks about “terministic screens,” which function as liniguistic filters (he also uses the filter on the camera as his metaphor, so there’s that). Language “reflects, selects, and deflects” elements of reality so that, essentially, I see the things I have language for and the language I use to label the things I see affects the way I will behave in response.
What’s key from Burke in re: this post is that we all have filters because we all have language. We can never be rid of filters nor would we want to be. Periodically though, we need to consciously adopt a different filter and step outside of ourselves to clean the crap off of our usual filter and refresh it as appropriate.
This subject deserves much better treatment than this article gives it. We do not perceive reality, we apply incoming information against a mental model of reality. Information that does not fit the model is often thrown out (unless it causes us to change our model). Or the model distorts information by forcing everything to conform by twisting it into shape.
Sports fans predictably see all close calls go their team’s way. I have witnessed many close but clear-upon-replay situations in which whole groups of fans all claim to see the opposite of reality. People who are passionate about their politics sieze upon every gaffe and example of poor leadership, real and imagined, that can be drummed up, while conveniently ignoring identical behavior in their own candidate or elected official.
The world is largely an unscientific place, which is to say that most people think that they “know” things. Scientific reality says that nothing can be known for certain; the best we can do is assign probabilities as to whether something is true. The primary method of learning scientifically is falsification. But instead of trying to prove our ideas false, we usually just try to collect more confirming evidence.
We will ignore any evidence to the contrary and feel confident in the mountain of evidence that has been mentally compiled in order to stay convinced.
A real introduction to this subject is available from the CIA (yes, *that* CIA):
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/psychology-of-intelligence-analysis/PsychofIntelNew.pdf
For me, getting over most of my filters was impossible until I became the one being assumed about based on my race by moving to Japan.
I realized that filtering is a very natural human response to another human, one that cannot be easily overcome, especially when society condones it. You can be made aware of it and still not see the fallacy behind it.
[...] positivity blinds that: humans only have so much sensory bandwidth to go around, and we all have filters (excellent article by Dustin Wax, read it). I may make a post on why the human race are horrible [...]
fitness management…
Your topic Funky and Fun Party Decoration ” hawthorngallery.net was interesting when I found it on Wednesday searching for fitness management…