Relevance and meaning decide 'the obvious'

What is obvious is not what is out there, but what we sought to seek and find! The famous gorilla experiment, is an example in case.  We human beings always are looking for, not merely looking at.  Blindness and bias are not negative features of our human nature.  They merely indicate that the individual is looking for something else! Something else is relevant and meaningful and therefore, misses the 'obvious'.  (Theory decides the observation.)

Reminds me of Fr TD, who always used to harp on seeing the good in the boys rather than the mischief or the nuisance they create, and when caught in the act say, "See, I told you!"

But the far more important point is that we also need to recognise and investigate the remarkable human capacities for generating questions and theories that direct our awareness and observations in the first place. Bias and blindness-obsessed studies will never get us to this vital recognition.

At its worst, the fascination with blindness and bias flattens humans, and science, to a morally dubious game of ‘gotcha’.

So in the case of Artificial Intelligence (AI), both optimism and worry are justified and valid.  Optimistic that they are better at observation and statistical analysis than human beings; worry, because we human beings are passing on to them our limited framework of what to observe and how to analyse!  Relevance and meaning are vital to intelligence and rationality - computers being good at the latter, not the former.  (Insights and quotes from Aeon)