Piagetian vortex, aka, Anna shouldn't spend this many hours by herself

We construct our knowledge of the world based on our background information. From this information, we create systems of knowledge called schemata.

Basically, a schema is just a set of information, or how you view the world. When you receive new information, you assimilate it into your schema. If you can't assimilate it because it contradicts your schema, you have to accommodate the new information by changing your schema.

For example...

Ducks are yellow.

Wait a minute! That's a duck, but it is not yellow!

New schema: Some ducks are yellow, but some are not. They can also be brown, and maybe other colors too.

I've noticed this process at play lately when overhearing strangers' phone conversations.

CONVERSATION 1

I'm trying on clothes in a thrift store dressing room. A Black lady outside the dressing room talks on her cell phone.

lady 1: What? You're locked up? Oh. I'm at the thrift store on North Avenue. No, I can't. Call Willy. I said, just call Willy.
my thoughts: Man, this lady's pretty callous. Does she think they get unlimited calls in jail? Obviously this guy chose HER as his one call. There's nothing else he can do, and she's just ignoring him! Maybe he does this all the time, though. Maybe she's sick of bailing him out, and he should just depend on his good friend Willy, since he always lets Willy influence his decision-making anyway. She's had it with him! She just wants to find a pair of jeans in peace today, for goodness' sake!
lady 1, several minutes later: Yeah Aaron's locked out of the house. Could you go get him the key?
my thoughts: Oooooooh. I get it.

New information accommodated, schema changed. Bam.


CONVERSATION 2

I'm walking down Wyman Park Drive, right behind Hopkins' campus. A petite, perhaps Indian, lady walks past me with her dog. She's wearing a cardigan and capri pants, both brightly colored and somewhat worn, and speaks with a slight accent.

lady 2: She's gotten two UTI's already...
my thoughts: This lady must be a medical professional, and she's talking about a patient or something.
lady 2: ...because she keeps picking up dead mice and eating them.
my thoughts: Ew! Ah yes, the dog.



These are two fairly simple examples of accommodating new information by changing your schema, but even within these very short anecdotes, I'm drawing on a huge amount of background knowledge. Not only was I relying on these people's words, but the entire context, including ethnicity and perceived socioeconomic status based on the area I was in at the time. Both my assumptions could have been proven right, but they were both just as easily proven wrong.

The whole thing gets much more convoluted when you start actually interacting with people.

That person doesn't like me. Oh wait, they just started a conversation. Huh, now they shot me a weird look. I'm gonna go stand over here. Now all future interactions with this person will be viewed through the lens I am currently painting. Schemata constantly shifting! New information can be perceived in too many ways! This is much more complicated than seeing a brown duck! I have no idea what color this duck is! How do I even know that what YOU call brown is the same as what I call brown!?

Ahem...in conclusion:

• Everything we believe is constantly shifting, and it's all based on our perceptions anyway, which change with the direction of the wind. What begins as the recounting of two amusing anecdotes supposedly linked only by the common motif of cell phone usage quickly becomes an epistemological crisis.
  
  OR
  
  
• I over-Anna-lyze everything.