We are weeding out based on superficial and incomplete data all the time. When you go to a supermarket with plenty of options to buy tomato sauce, you don't rea

We are weeding out based on superficial and incomplete data all the time. When you go to a supermarket with plenty of options to buy tomato sauce, you don't read the ingredient list of everyone of them. Maybe you do a first skim towards some "bio" tag section, or to the cheapest one. Once there you scan for known brands, and only when you get only two or three remaining options you read the fine print. Same when choosing a partner: the first thing you use to filter are looks, assuming the risk of filter out a below average looking person that will be your perfect match. We, of course, delude ourselves into thinking that our method is 100% objective and unbiased. But it never is. Even if you read each one of the 1,000 CVs, you won't read the first one with the same energy you read the 950, and it's likely that you anchor on a given CV that you read among the first 20, and everyone after that is meassured against it. CVs are by themselves only a proxy to a real person: why don't skip the CV and just interview everyone? Nobody's life fits in two pages.