Shoehorning
Shoehorning is the cognitive bias of force-fitting current events into one's existing beliefs or agenda, often by misinterpreting prophecies, predictions, or other sources to appear as confirmation.
THE IDEA
Description
The process of force-fitting some current affair into one's personal, political, or religious agenda. Many people aren't aware of how easy it is to make something look like confirmation of a claim after the fact, especially if the source of the confirmation is something in which they already believe, like Biblical prophecies, psychic predictions, astrological horoscopes, fortune cookies, and more.
Example #1
The source refers to an example in the Skeptic’s Dictionary (http://www.skepdic.com/shoehorning.html) involving religious interpretations of the September 11 attacks. The leaders’ statements are missing here, so the specific argument cannot be assessed from this excerpt.
Example #2
For thousands of years people have been rushing to scripture to try to make sense out of a current situation. Without a doubt, the same verses have been used over and over again for centuries as a prophecy of a current event. This is shoehorning. A great example of this is the BP oil spill in April of 2010. It has been suggested that the verses from Revelation 8:8–11 predicted this environmental disaster. With over 31,000 verses and 2,000 years of history to select from, a reader has considerable scope to find retrospective matches. Calling them “fulfilled prophecies” does not show that the event was specified clearly in advance; the passage supplies no numerical probability model for such matches.
Exception
Explaining events is perfectly legitimate, when reason is being used – and sometimes it may actually fit into your political or religious agenda.
When to use it
Interpreting news headlines to support a political stance by selectively focusing on confirming details.
Using vague horoscopes or fortune cookies to claim a prediction came true after the fact.
Applying religious prophecies to modern disasters to argue for a predetermined narrative.
Seeing patterns in random data to reinforce pre-existing personal or group beliefs.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
September 11 Attacks
The supplied commentary refers to religious interpretations of the 9/11 attacks, but omits the original statements. To assess shoehorning, compare the prediction’s wording before the event with the interpretation offered afterward.
BP Oil Spill
Some interpreted Revelation 8:8-11 as predicting the 2010 BP oil spill. Choosing a passage retrospectively from more than 31,000 verses leaves room for flexible matching; ask what specific prediction was made before the event.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How might you be shoehorning current events into your own beliefs or agenda to confirm what you already think?
Can you recall a time when you saw someone misinterpret vague predictions or prophecies to fit a recent event?
What steps can you take to distinguish between legitimate explanatory reasoning and shoehorning?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Logically Fallacious - The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies