Some of the satisfaction we derive from new knowledge stems from that information’s adherence to what we already knew.
The world seems to be a particular way, a new piece of information seems to support that assertion, and we receive a burst of dopamine from the parts of our brain that look for patterns and attempt to understand the world around us.
When new information seems to conflict with what we thought we knew about the world, it’s not uncommon to experience cognitive dissonance: a feeling of discomfort that arises from a clash between how we perceive things to be and new information that casts doubt upon, or complicates that existing understanding.
A challenge to our mental framework of how the world works, a moment of doubt as to the legitimacy of our assumptions, can lead to a cascade of worry and uncertainty. Where once we were confident, we become wobbly and intellectually insecure.
Many of us stave off such challenges to our worldview by clinging to what we currently believe and defending those assertions, those assumptions, that mental framework, with everything we’ve got.
One way to avoid this uncomfortable sensation almost completely, though, is to cleave to orthodox frameworks, be they religious and spiritual faiths, political ideologies, economic theories, philosophical systems, or some other system that describes a complete, end-to-end worldview.
Strict adherence to these concepts, these holistic understandings of how the world works, allows us to put these reins in other hands. Rather than facing intellectual and moral discomforts, personally, we foist them on our leaders, on our representatives, on PhDs and scholars and demagogues.
The result of this philosophical outsourcing is near-zero personal discomfort in the face of new data and challenges that might otherwise cause us to experience cognitive dissonance.
Which means we can easily go on believing whatever we want to believe or find it convenient to believe without suffering the psychological consequences that might otherwise make us take a look, think tricky thoughts, or change our minds.
To see the world through the lens of orthodoxy is to distort your perception so that it fits within the confines of conventional, traditional, or otherwise acceptable thinking.
Heterodox thinking, on the other hand, colors outside the lines a bit, and does not concern itself overmuch with how it might be perceived. It’s thinking without worrying whether or not one’s perceptions will conform with anyone else’s.
One downside of heterodox thinking is that you never fall squarely under the cookie cutter of any particular tribe, any particular brand, or any particular community, which can be uncomfortable. That means you’re seldom in total lockstep with anyone else and you have to take full responsibility for your thoughts and actions. There’s no one there to justify or forgive the bad things you might do, and there’s no one to point out the proper path you should take. You’re responsible for demarcating your own victories and defeats, good and bads, yesses and nos, and determining how best to behave based on these designations.
Within heterodox thinking, there is no proper path except the one you determine for yourself.
Pre-built intellectual structures tend to deify a particular perspective: here’s how things are, here’s what’s right and wrong, and these absolutes form the framework of who we are as a tribe—this is our shared point of view.
Defying that standard, though, and giving yourself permission to piece together your own beliefs, your own understanding of the world, helps you see things more three-dimensionally, with more nuance, and to be less certain; more intellectually humble.
Heterodoxy sometimes involves holding seemingly conflicting beliefs, and allowing ourselves to sit with those conflicts, think them through, and consider the possibility that there might be more than one right answer and more than one wrong answer. It allows us to construct a worldview in which things can be both good and bad from different perspectives, according to different metrics, and in different circumstances.
Absolute, black and white statements, will almost always prove to be flat, flawed, or predicated on incomplete information. Orthodoxy often requires that we support such statements and claims, and that we blindly accept mistruths and partial truths as absolute truths.
Heterodoxy allows you to acknowledge that life is complicated, that your worldview broadens as your body of knowledge and collection of experiences broaden, and that you can pick and choose the best ideas from any number of beliefs and perspectives.
It’s about being allowed, being encouraged, to cobble together a you-shaped point of view, rather than painfully contorting yourself to better fit within someone else’s box.