Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

This or that? With us or against us? Black or white? Coke or Pepsi? (Okay, not quite, but still...) Throughout our lives we are conditioned to take a side. That's the foundation of our digital world.  If you can't prove it, it doesn't exist (also popularly known as - False Dichotomy). 

Even when there isn't enough data to decide, the social forces around us 'motivate' us to have a polarized opinion. There is a need to decide.

"What... are you confused or something?" 

No one wants to hear that! As we take preference for one side we quickly develop a liking towards it with moral certainty. Such is our liking for polarized thinking, we seem to believe the 'other' option is ethically bankrupt. Of course being intelligent and evolved creatures, we only trust what we can see. Even though all indicators were telling us otherwise, most banks were very sure of their financial health before the weekend Lehman was allowed to fail. Most of us ignore the possibility of a Chinese collapse

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" ...billions of people use the same statement in different arguments to establish or deny the presence of God.

Even though we understand we often over-simplify things, we never seem to give up our addiction of seeing no more than two sides of the coin. I think there is a need to develop an aptitude for appreciating contradictory logic from an early age. This is nothing less than urgent, given the addition of Asian (and soon African and Arab) dimensions to the Western world. It will help us tolerate ambiguity and advance our reasoning used in the management of companies, nations, religions ... rather than being too keen on declaring some sort of victory, anyhow. 

What do you think?