In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.
In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.
The process went something like this:
A: I think {opinion} and this is why.
B: Well you're clearly biased.
A: How and in what way am I biased?
B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.
I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.
It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.
What do you think?
In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.
The process went something like this:
A: I think {opinion} and this is why.
B: Well you're clearly biased.
A: How and in what way am I biased?
B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.
I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.
It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.
What do you think?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2fViIZR
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire