The Power of Perception (#6)

Is it more compassionate to give people what they think they want, or what is actually in their best interest? Is a happy illusion preferable to an actual benefit if that benefit is invisible?

In a busy airport, I recently conducted an unwitting social experiment. I was standing in a long security line that was moving along quickly. In an effort to keep the line moving, I decided to get prepared while I waited. I removed all my liquids and gels from my baggage and put them into a zip-lock bag. I also got out my driver's license and put it in my pocket next to my boarding pass. During the 20-30 seconds I was kneeling to unzip my bag, the line progressed ten or fifteen feet, and so there was a big gap in front of me. I told the man behind me that I was almost finished and was about to stand up and close the gap, and he seemed fine with that. Just then, a TSA inspector kindly but firmly shouted at me to keep the line moving.

When the line brought me closer to the guard's position, I responded to him that I was not actually delaying the line at all, because as soon as I was finished, I moved forward and closed the gap again, and that, in fact, I was helping the line eventually move faster, because I was totally prepared and would not have to fumble around when it was my turn. His response: The TSA agents would rather have me fumble around at the front of the line, creating a slight actual delay only visible to a few people near me, rather than leave a gap in line that creates the illusion of a huge delay to everyone in line. The people in back can't see what's going on, so they might think it's just a terribly slow line.

And I understood exactly what he meant. It's disturbing when a line does not move - people get antsy. For everyone's psychological health, it would have been better to do what he requested, even though the net effect of this action would be to delay the line by an additional 30 seconds or so.

I suppose the most compassionate way to handle it would have been to find a bench somewhere and get prepared before taking my place in line, as I would do at a bank. But for the sake of argument, let's say my options were limited to delaying people without them knowing, or giving them the false impression of a delay.

Consider the following ethical thought experiment:

Say there were a mild toxin in the water supply of a certain city, in such a low concentration that the risk of harm to people by ingesting the water is slight but not zero. This toxin has no taste, so it is imperceptible. The water appears to be clean, fresh, and healthy, even with the toxin present.

Now let's say there were another chemical that could be added that would precipitate the toxin into a harmless oxide, making the water 100% safe to drink. The precipitate would add a bit of turbidity (cloudy appearance) to the water, giving the impression that something might be amiss with the water. (All you chemists out there, please suspend disbelief for a moment.)

As mayor of that city, which option would you choose? Would you oxidize the toxin, making the water appear turbid and possibly unsafe, though completely safe, or would you allow people to continue obliviously ingesting the toxin from crystal clear water with the illusion of safety?

I know what I would do. Can you guess already? My integrity would not allow me to leave the toxin and make myself look good. Even though it might cost me re-election, I would add the oxidizer. It would require a lot of press conferences and other educational efforts, and still the people would not understand, and still they would feel anger and fear about the turbidity in the water. They might mistrust me and think that I was lying to them in my press conferences. However, in this situation the moral imperative seems quite clear.

Or is it? Are there situations where integrity requires choosing the illusion? When the perception of harm is actually more harmful than the actual harm? (Or the perception of good actually carries more benefit than the actual good?) The airline security line may be an example of this. When people see a long line that is not moving, maybe their blood pressure and heart rate increase. Maybe their respiration rate increases and their palms start to sweat as they contemplate missing their flights.

We've all heard of the placebo effect: an inert substance given to someone often actually cures them of a disease because of their expectation that it is a "medicine." Similarly, a "nocebo" is an inert substance that a person believes to be harmful, and because of that expectation, studies show that it often actually harms their health.

What if the turbid (but harmless) water in our example created a nocebo effect on some of the residents? Because of the false perception that they were drinking toxic water, the people might exhibit some ill health effects. Is the harm caused by this nocebo effect greater than the harm that might be caused by the actual toxin? This certainly complicates matters.

Do you care what doctors might say about you when you are unconscious from anesthesia? Is there any harm in it? What if your subconscious were to absorb such messages?

The comedian Paula Poundstone said that when she was a waitress, if someone was rude to her, she would go in the back and secretly touch their eggs! Is there any harm in that if the customer never finds out? What if the waitress's hands are as clean as the cook's?

Would you rather have a computer hacker imperceptibly steal $5 per month from your bank account for the rest of your life, or would you rather have a dishonest cashier swipe $100 cash from you just once? Most people would say that they'd prefer the latter, because it amounts to less money, but in reality I think most people would prefer the former because its effect would not be noticed. We'll all survive a small theft like that - the real harm is the emotional stress that such a theft creates, the feelings of violation and powerlessness. These feelings aren't in the picture unless we know about the theft.

Most of us wouldn't choose the happy illusion, because of our pride and our idealistic affinity for truth and honesty. But that isn't reason enough to dismiss it. The power of perception is too important to ignore. The consequences of an illusion (or lack thereof) must be treated as real consequences and factored into the analysis. In many cases, ignorance may be more than just bliss.