When observing people’s preferences and perception of things, one of the most interesting things to me is how truth, morality, quality, and popularity are conflated. Don’t get me wrong—I understand why: popularity is usually a great indicator of quality; honesty is generally considered to be moral; doing something the right way is considered to be better than doing something the wrong way. It makes sense why people see these ideas as synonymous. But there are plenty of exceptions that people should probably be aware of so that they don’t let these heuristics cause them to make poor judgments in specific situations.
Let’s start with truth. Is truth always good? What if you’re talking to a dying person who is comforting himself with the idea of going to heaven, but you believe that the truth is there is nothing after death? Is the blunt truth moral in that situation? Most people would say, no, that person should keep their mouth shut or be supportive rather than give their opinion. Similarly, it’s generally considered to be rude or mean to call out skin imperfections, critique a child’s product as if you were judging a professional’s, or “kick a person while they’re down” even if the statement is true. So, honesty isn’t always the best policy per se—maybe it should be, “Honesty is usually the best policy.”
Similarly, morality isn’t necessarily quality. The most famous example of this in the last couple of decades is Tim Tebow, the famous NCAA and NFL quarterback who spent his life in service to his Lord and others while underperforming on the professional football field (note: he performed very well in college). Millions of people rooted for him purely because of his humanitarian work and religious conviction. However, he was not an NFL-level passer and left the league after a few years. His morality as a human being, unfortunately, did not equate to quality as a starting NFL quarterback. It does make people want him to be, though.
The most contentious, of course, is that what is popular is not necessarily true, moral, or best. There are probably infinite examples of this; examples include Windows, McDonald’s, the flat Earth theory, gambling, and sex work. Are Windows and McDonald’s the best operating system and cheeseburger, respectively? Many would argue that they are not (e.g., Linux, MacOS, iOS, ChromeOS vs. Windows and Five Guys, In-N-Out Burger, Jack in the Box, Shake Shack, and Whataburger vs. McDonald’s), but they are the most popular for consumers in their respective markets. What about popular theories like how the Earth is flat, NASA faked the moon landing, and Elvis is still alive? They have a cult-like popularity, but that doesn’t make them true. Then, you have activities that are very popular but aren’t necessarily moral, such as gang activity, gambling, drug use, and infidelity.
If this is the case, then where does the heuristic that these are proxies for each other fail? First, popularity is generally a good indicator that something is satisfactory given the requirements, but it might not be the best in one area or satisfy your specific requirements. For example, Windows is very good at being accessible to the average person. Linux, however, requires a decent amount of technical knowledge to perform the same tasks—even if it would perform better for someone with said knowledge. Similarly, McDonald’s does a great job of providing you with a cheeseburger, French fries, and a drink quickly, at low cost, and with a consistent taste that people generally like. Yes, you might go somewhere else for the best cheeseburger, but you probably have to sacrifice one of the attributes that McDonald’s offering has (e.g., price). This is why you might not be happy even though it satisfies millions of others’ needs.
What about false information that is popular? Unfortunately, there is so much information in this world that it is often difficult to know which pieces to incorporate into your reasoning or ignore. For example, we know that the Earth is round, but it is so large that any one human looking around will observe it to be flat (even though you can see on the horizon line a slight curve when you’re looking out over the ocean, for example). Flat Earth believers, then, are trusting their own perception of walking and driving on a flat surface as evidence overriding all other evidence, such as photos of Earth from space or fact that the Sun, moon, and stars are all positioned in the sky in predictable patterns annually that proves that spherical bodies are spinning around each other in circular patterns in space. Similarly, a skeptic will view moon landing footage and, given a weird lighting effect or photo imperfection, believe that it was faked. Then, in cases of Elvis still being alive, there is just the strong desire for him to still be alive despite all evidence to the contrary.
Finally, what about popular immoral behavior? Well, there are two primary reasons for that disconnect:
In the example of gambling or sex work, these vices may be viewed as less moral to some people than others (and, interestingly, many people judge the sex worker and the sex customer or the gaming company and gambler differently). In the examples of gang activity, sex work, drug use, and infidelity, the desires for belonging, money, dopamine, and sex may outweigh whatever misgivings someone might have had or been told to have regarding those activities. Both the perception of morality and the desire to do something despite its morality are leading to popular activities that aren’t necessarily moral.
So, what can you do with this information? First and foremost, know the exceptions to any blanket rules you have regarding these concepts. For example, know that you might not like a popular movie if you personally aren’t interested in the genre. Know that telling the blunt truth isn’t always the best approach. Know that doing the right thing won’t necessarily make you the best at something. These exceptions are key to knowing when you shouldn’t conflate these ideas.
Second, learn how to discuss these with others when you have to justify your decision or recommendation. Everyone knows the, “If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?” argument for doing the right thing despite the wrong thing being popular, but have others. If you use a different operating system, become effective at stating your unique requirements that make it best for you. If you need to advise someone to be polite or deceptive, make sure that they see the better outcome for all parties compared to being bluntly honest (note: if it’s better for one party at the other’s expense, that’s when deception is generally considered to be immoral). If something is morally right but unpopular, be ready to justify the act. These justifications will help break the pressure to do the thing that is popular or most common to do when the best or right thing is actually something else in a particular situation.
Finally, remember that people have different information, desires, and beliefs. Therefore, their truth, morals, needs, and interests will differ. As long as they aren’t hurting anyone, you should generally try to respect people’s differences. If there is something that you disagree with, try to focus on the harm that you can agree on versus the belief that you probably will disagree on. For example, if you believed in a ban on firearms but the other person believes in a right to self-defense, then you still likely agree that no one should shoot an innocent person. If you allow people to have the differing beliefs so that you can live peacefully in society, you’ll be better off; if you focus on eliminating the negative outcome that you can agree on, then you can possibly work together on things that will be mutually beneficial without having to change their core beliefs.
What’s true, moral, or best is not necessarily what is popular. When you use one as a proxy for the other, make sure that you keep in mind the exceptions and know when they should override your default decision making. Most importantly, be ready for resistance when interacting with people who are following the default heuristic and are not factoring in your exception. The goal is to get to the best outcome for yourself and the people you care about in life (without hurting anyone), and these little situational adjustments are important not to make a mistake following blanket rules.