In some online debates I have encountered what appear to be a number of different cognitive biases.
The latest is the confirmation bias in which people favour evidence that supports their assertions while ignoring or suppressing evidence that undermines their position.
Here's the wiki introduction:
In order to fight this bias, it is important to consider how different information contradicts our desired position. A good start is in reading entire passages in order to correctly establish the contextual meaning of a statment.
The latest is the confirmation bias in which people favour evidence that supports their assertions while ignoring or suppressing evidence that undermines their position.
Here's the wiki introduction:
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about current political issues, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).
A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.
Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_biasI wanted to highlight this bias because I noticed it among some Traditional Catholics, but also some Protestants. I believe it manifests itself as 'proof texting'.
In order to fight this bias, it is important to consider how different information contradicts our desired position. A good start is in reading entire passages in order to correctly establish the contextual meaning of a statment.
Comments
Post a Comment