What is the problem with misuse? Is misuse not a big deal?

Leaving misuse unaddressed means nullifying the value of unconscious bias (implicit bias) research, which has garnered global attention, in Japan.  This is ridiculous.  The loss is immeasurable.  It also includes the benefits that society could have gained and the credibility of the country or organization that failed to scrutinize the misuse.

Furthermore, once misuse spreads, correction is not easy, and secondary damage occurs. Those who spread or have spread the misuse have no incentive to actively acknowledge their mistakes from a self-preservation perspective. These individuals are already in positions to disseminate information, and it takes energy to point out and correct their misuse. This results in secondary damage, where the energy that could have been spent on other matters is instead used for correction. This blog is one example.

If the content is not scrutinized, it is not easy to correct it after it has spread due to conflicts of interest among those involved.

Generated image of incorrectness

Their main counterargument to pointing out misuse is to downplay its impact by saying that there are more important things than misuse, so it doesn’t need to be addressed. They argue that if something more important is included, some errors can be tolerated.

But who decides what is tolerable?

Those spreading the misuse often cite unilateral judgments without fact-checking, such as “Let’s not assign responsible work to her because she’s a woman”, as examples of “unconscious bias” and claim that it is inappropriate. This is because it narrows the other person’s options without following a rational decision-making process. Similarly, their attitude of “We want to convey more important things, so let’s keep quiet about the misuse / not address them” is an inappropriate act of deciding without confirming whether the recipient wants to know about the misuse. If asked in a seminar or training on unconscious bias (implicit bias) whether they want to know that the term “unconscious bias” currently being spread in Japan is being misused with “substantiated” evidence, many people would answer “Yes”.  This is because no one wants to accept incorrect usage as the truth. “There are more important things” is merely the intention (probably for self-preservation) of the person saying it.

Moreover, whether there are more important things and whether it is misuse are separate issues. It is necessary to organize the points and discuss them. An objective perspective, distanced from vested interests, is required for verification.