Our brains fill in facts that are not actually facts but inferences that we have drawn from the context of a given situation. Its how we know, as an example, if someone is angry at the person that theyre with or if they are in danger from that person. Its how we know if people in a room are whispering in order to be secretive or if they are just being respectful of the noise level. I bring up this contextualizing because a lot of us did that when we saw that brief edited snippet of surveillance video from the Ferguson Market. We were told that it was showing us a robbery. But it doesnt. Thats an inference we are drawing from being told so. The video shows two people, with some items we are presuming to be store merchandise, one of whom, presumably Mike, is having a seemingly angry conversation with someone we presume to be the store clerk. We see that person shove the presumed clerk, turn to leave, then turn around and say something in what appears to be an angry manner in response to whatever the presumed clerk said to him, make an angry seeming shrugging gesture, then turns and leave. What we do not see in that snippet is whether or not the merchandise was paid for. We also do not hear what the presumed store clerk says. We do not hear the reply that came before and during the shove. We do not hear the response from the presumed clerk that prompted the return with the presumably angry shrug gesture. We do not hear what is said as the person, presumably Mike, leaves the store. We do not hear what the clerk says when he exits the store right after and stands in the doorway gesturing. We were told it was a strongarm robbery, and our brains filled in all the things we did not see or hear in order to match that story. Presuming that was indeed the store clerk I can imagine a dozen things -- not related to shoplifting or theft of any kind -- that he could have said that would have been antagonizing enough to lead to that little confrontation. Can you?
Posted on: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:23:16 +0000