Aug 9, 2023 10:23 PM
(This post was last modified: Aug 9, 2023 10:27 PM by C C.)
https://iai.tv/articles/katherine-puddif..._auid=2020
INTRO: Most of us tend to think that biased reasoning always leads us astray. But Katherine Puddifoot challenges this common-sense assumption and argues that motivated reasoning can lead us towards the truth.
EXCERPT: . . . We should not assume that motivated reasoning, or all other biased thinking that involves ignoring high quality and relevant information, can only lead us astray. Sometimes judgements that are more reflective of the information available around us can bring poor consequences, preventing downstream knowledge gains. Engaging in motivated or otherwise biased reasoning that involves ignoring high quality information can avoid these poor consequences and remove barriers to knowledge. At other times, ignoring the same information can be seriously costly. The challenge we have is to try to harness the gains that can be made by processing the information without suffering the costs... (MORE - missing details)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Not surprising to see "systemic oppression" politics advocating motivated reasoning. Decolonization of knowledge can't be fulfilled if you're playing the game according to the Euroscentric standards of the tyrant West. And the soft sciences are already rife with compromised science (including bias), so that's the obvious choice for both implementing a foray and leading a charge into the rest. And the initial incursion must conservatively express some reservations and urge caution -- that's the baby steps for getting a foot into the door.
INTRO: Most of us tend to think that biased reasoning always leads us astray. But Katherine Puddifoot challenges this common-sense assumption and argues that motivated reasoning can lead us towards the truth.
EXCERPT: . . . We should not assume that motivated reasoning, or all other biased thinking that involves ignoring high quality and relevant information, can only lead us astray. Sometimes judgements that are more reflective of the information available around us can bring poor consequences, preventing downstream knowledge gains. Engaging in motivated or otherwise biased reasoning that involves ignoring high quality information can avoid these poor consequences and remove barriers to knowledge. At other times, ignoring the same information can be seriously costly. The challenge we have is to try to harness the gains that can be made by processing the information without suffering the costs... (MORE - missing details)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Not surprising to see "systemic oppression" politics advocating motivated reasoning. Decolonization of knowledge can't be fulfilled if you're playing the game according to the Euroscentric standards of the tyrant West. And the soft sciences are already rife with compromised science (including bias), so that's the obvious choice for both implementing a foray and leading a charge into the rest. And the initial incursion must conservatively express some reservations and urge caution -- that's the baby steps for getting a foot into the door.
