The article by McKay & Dennett (M&D) presents a thoughtful classification and analysis of the evolutionary issues involved in misbelief. The notion that certain misbeliefs may arise through the normal functioning of the belief-formation system (as opposed to its breakdown), by virtue of relying on incomplete or inaccurate information, is clearly acceptable (and not new). What is debatable, however, is the authors' key proposition, that a subclass of such misbeliefs has been systematically adaptive in the evolutionary past. The usefulness of this suggestion depends to a large extent on finding an example that meets the authors' commendably sound and strict criteria, yet the sole example of adaptive, evolved misbelief that is proposed by M&D, “positive illusions,” is not convincing.
One should first note that the concept of positive illusions, as well as the term itself and psychologists' (mis?)beliefs about the positive consequences of self-serving distortions of reality, are all of quite recent vintage (e.g., Taylor Reference Taylor1989). M&D helpfully contrast this view of mental health with Jahoda's (Reference Jahoda1958) earlier and more measured one. Whether or not one wishes to engage in culture-theorizing about the contrast between the fear of social ridicule and the self-restraint evident in the Eisenhower era (demonstrated, for example, in Asch's [Reference Asch1956] “social conformity” experiments), on one hand, and the less-disguised greed and self-promotion of the more recent I-want-it-all-now generations, on the other, the fact is that the content of many positive illusions is a quite recent phenomenon and that the results of many of the studies are likely to be ephemeral and support Gergen's (Reference Gergen1973) “social psychology as history” view. It is therefore risky (if not unwarranted) to be talking about the creation and implementation of misbelief as adaptive – let alone adapted – selection-driven behaviors (see the authors' Note 3).
There are also questions about the empirical evidence marshaled by M&D (all of it dating from after about 1985). A number of studies purporting that “most people … see themselves as better than most others on a range of dimensions” (target article, sect. 13, para. 2) appear to be methodologically unsound. M&D should have more closely examined the presence of problems and alternative explanations related to the framing of questions, the differential social desirability of various response alternatives, and the Pygmalion effect before implying that positive illusions were present and favored in the ancestral environment. In addition, quotes from psychologists firmly committed to the environmentalist position – such as the social-learning theory, with its (mis?)beliefs about the teachability and ready amelioration of just about every personal shortcoming – cannot be considered an entirely unbiased source.
Other studies have tended to ignore the participants' referential framework and may not have dealt with misbeliefs. For example, people who claim that their current partner is better than most are likely to be referring to their past partners' failings and the undesirable traits and behaviors of people in all those failed marriages that they know and read about. Even with regard to an inflated opinion of one's children, studies have presumably not polled the opinions of the parents (including potential ones) who terminated pregnancies – or who committed infanticide, physical and/or sexual abuse, and the more common acts of neglect. If even such parents, as is possible and even likely, were to have an inflated idea of the merits of their offspring and potential offspring, this would raise interesting questions about the meaningfulness of using the questionnaire-retrospective research approach to probe matters relevant to evolutionary adaptation.
To the extent that positive illusions can, in fact, be adequately documented (regardless of whether or not they are evolved, adaptive misbeliefs), it is of interest to try to place them in a broader contemporary context. If people's positive illusions about their personal worth and ability are translated into behavior evident to others, all sorts of negative consequences are likely to ensue, from mild ridicule to severe ostracism. Unless, that is, the unbridled expression of positive illusions has been proclaimed a desirable social norm. It is clear that there is no shortage, perhaps especially in the United States, of change agents, and socio-cultural, economic, and even legal factors, involved in the encouragement of positive illusions: the generally prevailing environmentalist (“nurture”) bias in the educational system and mass culture; the politico-legal doctrine of universal entitlement and reduced personal responsibility (including exaggerated emotivist explanations of both legal and illegal behavior); and the broad societal push toward spending on credit, embodied in the “optimistic” (something for nothing, “no money down”) consumption-based policies for one's alleged betterment and advancement. The empirical findings, to the extent that they are reliable and valid in the first place, document what is essentially a consumer response to the ubiquitous messages from the pop-psychology and advertising industries, which make wildly unrealistic promises and encourage an assertive expression of self-worth. Most of these are American homegrown products, but they have been distributed widely, especially in the Western world.
However, the present financial crisis may have already provided a corrective to positive illusions at both the personal and societal levels. The crisis has certainly led to a dramatic drop in the previously inflated average self-image, for example, by people in countries as different as Iceland and Latvia. Predictably, Western politicians and bankers will resist this trend. Quite recently, in the Financial Times, the executive chairman of the giant international banking concern HSBC declared: “About 80 per cent of this country [United Kingdom] considers itself middle class. I doubt that was true then [a generation ago]” (Barber Reference Barber2009). Yet, on the same date and in the same news source, it was reported that McDonald's is the largest private employer in France (Morrison Reference Morrison2009).
One is left with the conclusion that rather than being a genuine adaptation, most positive illusions are examples of doxastically uncommitted action policies implemented at both the individual and societal levels; and even when they are doxastically relevant, genuine misbeliefs, they are unlikely to be evolved and adaptive – and are instead an ephemeral phenomenon limited to the present social and economic moment. Or perhaps limited to the recent past, for there are already signs of a reduction of positive illusions as a function of the current financial crisis.
