The blind spots

Premium

Much of who we are — our habits, contradictions, and blind spots — remains invisible to us. From private quirks to patterns in public life, recognising them is the first step toward understanding and change.

A man cannot see his own back, and he cannot hear himself snoring. These harmless physical limitations, often joked about, point to something deeper about human nature. Much of what defines us — our habits, tones, contradictions, and small hypocrisies — lies just outside our field of vision. Others notice them instantly; we discover them only when someone is honest, or unkind enough, to point them out.

The trouble is not that we have blind spots. That is universal. The trouble is how touchy we become when they are exposed. Tell someone that he snores loudly enough to keep others awake, and the response is rarely a simple apology. More often it is denial, irritation, or a counter-charge: You’re exaggerating. You’re too sensitive. You snore too. What should have been a minor correction escalates into an argument. The reaction is disproportionate because what is threatened is not sleep, but self-image.

Daniel Kahneman, who spent a lifetime studying how we think, noted that we are skilled at spotting bias in others while remaining largely blind to our own. This asymmetry explains much everyday conflict. We consult an inner judge who is patient, sympathetic, and endlessly willing to accept explanations — provided the defendant is ourselves. When others behave poorly, we infer character; when we do so, we cite circumstances.

Alain de Botton puts it more gently. Self-knowledge, he suggests, is difficult not because we are dishonest, but because we are too close to ourselves. Familiarity breeds a kind of moral near-sightedness. Our intentions loom large; our effects on others fade. We remember what we meant to say, not how it sounded. We recall what we tried to do, not what we actually did.

This explains why patterns are easier for others to see than for us. A single forgotten promise is excusable. A series suggests indifference — but that conclusion feels unfair inwardly. The same is true of temper, condescension, or inconsistency. To be told these form a pattern feels like an accusation, even when it is merely observation.

What is true of individuals is often magnified in public life. Few arenas display blind spots as vividly as politics, where power insulates self-perception and criticism is treated as hostility. Leaders speak of intention while dismissing consequence, and respond to exposure not with correction but with counter-accusation. The inability to hear one’s own snoring becomes, at scale, an inability to tolerate scrutiny.

The fiercest arguments often begin this way. Someone names a habit or contradiction that had gone unremarked, and the response is not reflection but resistance. Voices rise, motives are questioned, and the discussion shifts from “Is this true?” to “Who are you to say it?” Exposure stings because it reminds us we are seen from angles we cannot control.

Yet there is something quietly hopeful. Blind spots, once acknowledged, are among the few aspects of ourselves that can genuinely change. What we cannot see cannot be corrected; what we reluctantly recognise might still be improved. The difficulty lies in learning to treat uncomfortable feedback not as an attack, but as a mirror.

Perhaps wisdom begins with a modest admission: that we are all walking around with unseen backs and unheard noises, insisting — often loudly — that they do not exist.

mohammedjameel_99@hotmail.com