Fundamental Attribution Error: They Are Impatient, You Were Late
The same behaviour gets explained by character in others and by circumstance in yourself. The asymmetry is not mainly self-flattery — it is what you can and cannot see.
The same behaviour gets explained by character in others and by circumstance in yourself. The asymmetry is not mainly self-flattery — it is what you can and cannot see.
Every account is assembled from what survived, by someone who already knows the ending. That single fact makes events look more inevitable than they were — and explains why careful history sounds less certain.
You can recognise thousands of faces and actively maintain far fewer relationships. The famous figure of 150 is contested — the underlying constraint is not.
When what you did clashes with what you think, one has to give. The action already happened and the belief is private — so people end up sincerely believing whatever justifies what they did.
A rare disease, a 99% accurate test, a positive result — and roughly a 9% chance you're ill. The gap comes from one number most people leave out entirely.
The meeting you weren't invited to has two explanations that fit equally well. Preferring the boring one isn't generosity — it's what happens when you count how much each explanation assumes.
When evidence agrees with us we ask what it shows. When it disagrees we ask what's wrong with it. Apply that second question to one side only and you can dismantle half the evidence without noticing.
Early networks showed you what your contacts posted, in order. A modern feed is a ranked selection made on your behalf — and what it optimises for explains most of the arguments about it.