Cognitive biases that ensured our initial survival now make it difficult to address long-term challenges that threaten our existence, like climate change. But they can help us too.
Evolution is not on humanity’s side.
“We have evolved to pay attention to immediate threats. We overestimate threats that are less likely but easier to remember, like terrorism, and underestimate more complex threats, like climate change.”
Four basic cognitive biases contribute to our astonishing unwillingness to deal with an obvious problem and its very high probability of disastrous impact:
Hyperbolic discounting: The perception that the present is more important than the future.
Bystander effect: The belief that someone else will deal with a crisis.
Sunk-cost fallacy: A bias towards staying the course even in the face of negative outcomes. The more we've invested time, energy, or resources into that course (e.g., fossil fuels), the more likely we are to stick with it – even if it no longer seems optimal.
Lack of concern for future generations: We care most about just a few generations of family members: great-grandparents to great-grandchildren. It’s hard for us to see how the sacrifices required for generations existing beyond this short time span are worth it.
BONUS: Framing effect: Humans are less likely to change behavior when challenges are framed negatively instead of positively. People are more likely to act in relation to a positive frame (“a clean energy future will save X number of lives”) versus a negative statement (“we’re going to go extinct due to climate change”).
