Halo effect

In a group, how often have you heard the comment: "He is not a good chap! Only involved in work - no time for family at all."; or a similar remark that labels a person thoroughly and paints him from head to foot because of one aspect of his life? 

Judgement, an unavoidable aspect of thought, has two qualities that compromise fairness. One is that it is subjective; it depends on who is judging and what that person's value system is. A judgement reveals as much about the judge as the judged. The other is, it suffers from halo effect, something which comes through in the dialogue mentioned earlier. 

 A person lives his life through roles. His understanding of these roles are fed in during his growing up years. He has a mental map of what is the role of a father, son, employee, husband, friend social worker, patriot. They all involve certain activities. Activities consume resource, be it time or money. How to allocate a resource in case of a constraint comes out of his value system. So it may end up that if he has to spend one hour at work and one hour with family and has only one hour in hand, he may give it to work. His value system may say:"I am paid for working and my first priority is work". Another person's value system may say: "I live for my family and beyond working hours they get priority". If we really have to pass an opinion on a person (we'll avoid judging), we have to see him in all roles. It is very rare that a person can excel in all roles. A good employee may be a poor family-man. A good wife may be a poor mother. A good son may turn out a poor patriot. If we look at only one role and pass an opinion on the whole set, that is halo effect. 

 Of course, it is best not to pass an opinion at all. That person's value system is also a sort of given and beyond his capability to modify. But then, what to talk about at parties?

Train to forget

As a child I was once advised to take Brainolia, a popular tonic at that time, for improving memory. The ability to remember is a laudable one and quizzers have to have it in abundance. 

This relates to factual memory. When it comes to emotional memory, I don't have to try to remember. Every embarrassment, things that make made me angry or sad, every slight, insult, breach-of-trust is remembered in technicolor and recalled at will. 

Times do come when remembering is not fun anymore. And unless we forget, it is impossible to start afresh. But how to forget? Well, one can either try to deliberately remember the good things (what is called pratipaksh bhavana), so that in the mind the opinion about the offending person ultimately tilts towards the positive. The past is nothing but present memory. So if we can influence our memory a bit, it helps. 

Or one can realise and accept the truth that inside the apparently steady physical body, everyone is actually new every moment, like every frame of a film is actually a new one - looks continuous since it runs. The person who offended us may be different now. Maybe mostly same because of his/her own memory function, but we can admit the possibility for change, and not give in to a "Kuchh nahi honewala" syndrome. 

Intelligence knows how to remember. Wisdom knows how to forget.