Q&A: Free Choice and Social Influence
Free Choice and Social Influence
Question
It’s pretty clear to me that the answer is very simple, and yet I had trouble formulating it:
People often cite studies about dropout rates in the Religious Zionist community (or in other communities), and they point to very high dropout rates. Everyone discusses the educational failure of the Religious Zionist community (or of other communities) in light of those figures, along with advice and solutions for how to solve the crisis, and so on.
My question is: doesn’t this whole attempt to look for “reasons” and “explanations” for dropout contradict the principle of free choice? Why not just say that the reason dropout is so high is simply that people chose it. Not because of openness, or closedness, and so on, but only because they chose to do it. With no other reason or contributing factor.
(And if you ask: if so, why are dropout rates different in other communities? I would answer that in those other communities they allow less choice.)
I hope I made myself clear.
Answer
First, I’ve written here more than once that I’m not sure the dropout rate among Haredim is actually lower. There are different kinds of dropping out, and this is not the place to elaborate.
Second, statistics are affected by circumstances, even when each individual person chooses freely. Put a hundred people in front of two paths: a flat road versus a downhill road. And another hundred people: a flat road versus an uphill road. The percentage of those who choose the flat road will differ between the two groups, even though each person is choosing freely. Circumstances influence our choices, even if they do not determine them.
I mentioned there an example of this from Maimonides and the Raavad in chapter 6 of the laws of repentance (regarding the punishment of the Egyptians who enslaved Israel).