Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Based on this post below, wouldn't choosing which facts to consider and represent be biased because somebody ultimately has to do this? But I do agree that there will be people who do this better than others. That is what makes it biased but not in a negative way.
It is not so much a question of living without bias. The question or challenge is how to deal with it, and yes, there is what we might consider "good bias" and what we might agree is "bad bias." Much about what we have learned over time develops that bias one way or another. The end result can be good or bad. Do we end up being a racist for example? Sexist? Homophobic?
The evaluation along those lines is yet another matter we are called upon to judge as best we are able. About ourselves and others. Don't mean to repeat myself, but there are a good many ways to address these challenges and clearly there are people who do better in these regards than others. That's all...
Not only do all your comments make clear that you are discerning who is doing better than others with your take on reality, you argue that your awareness justifies your opinion along these lines. Funny this...
Yes. I am most certainly of the opinion that some people can judge far better than others. I can think of countless examples or ways that prove this simple fact to be true. Simply drive about town and on the freeway. In no time it becomes clear there are those who have poor judgment with respect to their safety and those of others. Judgment often confirmed by a law enforcement officer when we're lucky.
The existence of the extremes on either side of the Bell Curve does not justify unwarrantedly applying their traits to the middle, especially when you focus on the low intelligence extremes as if they somehow should characterize the middle. There are extremely gullible and unintelligent members of any population group that gives us no useful knowledge about the middle, vice versa.
Not only do all your comments make clear that you are discerning who is doing better than others with your take on reality, you argue that your awareness justifies your opinion along these lines. Funny this...
But that is the game, to play down the stronger position. From science has been wrong before, to this implication that even rational argument is suspect, but only when atheists do it. The position is quickly ignored when theists use science and rational argument.
Except that Gldn is claiming to be independent, so are you saying his position doesn't allow for much dialogue regarding solving problems either?
I'm just a bit unclear on what you are getting at with regards to LM?
In any case, all of us are biased in one way or another, regardless any thinking about how objective we may be. It's an inevitable consequence of where and how we were raised, our environment, the culture we live in and everything we are exposed to. Nobody comes to be who they are independently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
"It's an inevitable consequence of where and how we were raised, our environment, the culture we live in and everything we are exposed to" and getting older (among other things). AKA my Cement Theory...
I'm assuming that you recognise that you would not be first person to come to these exact same conclusions?
The existence of the extremes on either side of the Bell Curve does not justify unwarrantedly applying their traits to the middle, especially when you focus on the low intelligence extremes as if they somehow should characterize the middle. There are extremely gullible and unintelligent members of any population group that gives us no useful knowledge about the middle, vice versa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heron31
Not sure what "vice versa" means in this context. Nevertheless, you are certainly right about the extremely gullible and unintelligent members. In fact, I am astonished at how many people in the U.S. show themselves to belong to that group, and, ridiculously, proudly so. It is truly horrendous that so many in this great nation are so gullible and lack the intelligence to determine, or even care about, what is true as opposed to what is blatantly false, even after the blatant falsity has been shown to be exactly that.
The vice versa means that the extremes on the low gullibility and high intelligence side of the Bell Curve tell us nothing about the middle either. How have you so confidently and clearly ascertained "what is true and what is blatantly false" in this great nation??? Surely you do not rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. Tell me your secret for ascertaining "what is true and what is blatantly false."
I'm assuming that you recognise that you would not be first person to come to these exact same conclusions?
Certainly not the first. Hopefully not the last. For me it's more about increasing awareness. Not at all about being first. My Cement Theory simply adds a bit of definition or elaboration with regard to how this dynamic tends to work. Much of which has been corroborated by experts in the field well before I came along (and after). Yet, all too many people don't seem aware or enough aware nevertheless.
The vice versa means that the extremes on the low gullibility and high intelligence side of the Bell Curve tell us nothing about the middle either. How have you so confidently and clearly ascertained "what is true and what is blatantly false" in this great nation??? Surely you do not rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. Tell me your secret for ascertaining "what is true and what is blatantly false."
Too bad it's a secret for so many people, but perhaps because there are so many ways to go about ascertaining what is true, lots of people either don't know how, don't want to make the effort or don't care. Just to name a few reasons all too many people don't bother enough or bother at all. To "triangulate for the truth" as I like to call it.
Though there is not necessarily any 100 percent full-proof way to do so, at least a good many ways have already been touched upon in this thread. Plenty to consider for those who are interested, and for those who still are, here's still some more...
"The idea is that people should have a fundamental sense of media literacy. And based on a study recently released by Stanford University researchers, many people don't.
Sam Wineburg, a professor of education and history at Stanford and the lead author of the study, said a solution is for all readers to read like fact checkers. But how do fact checkers do their job?"
The vice versa means that the extremes on the low gullibility and high intelligence side of the Bell Curve tell us nothing about the middle either. How have you so confidently and clearly ascertained "what is true and what is blatantly false" in this great nation??? Surely you do not rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. Tell me your secret for ascertaining "what is true and what is blatantly false."
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Too bad it's a secret for so many people, but perhaps because there are so many ways to go about ascertaining what is true, lots of people either don't know how, don't want to make the effort or don't care. Just to name a few reasons all too many people don't bother enough or bother at all. To "triangulate for the truth" as I like to call it.
Though there is not necessarily any 100 percent full-proof way to do so, at least a good many ways have already been touched upon in this thread. Plenty to consider for those who are interested, and for those who still are, here's still some more...
"The idea is that people should have a fundamental sense of media literacy. And based on a study recently released by Stanford University researchers, many people don't.
Sam Wineburg, a professor of education and history at Stanford and the lead author of the study, said a solution is for all readers to read like fact checkers. But how do fact checkers do their job?"
Far as I'm concerned, the goal is to do better than we already think we do. To think about it and try. Not for perfection but for improvement. Always.
Thanks for at least confirming that you DO rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. The definition of "legitimate news sources" in your article pretends that the only sources of fake news are fake sites or social media. That completely ignores the fact that legitimate news sources are also dispensers of fake news.
Thanks for at least confirming that you DO rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. The definition of "legitimate news sources" in your article pretends that the only sources of fake news are fake sites or social media. That completely ignores the fact that legitimate news sources are also dispensers of fake news.
And they correct their errors. Do you believe that legitimate news sources should not be trusted either? And if so us that because they simetimecerror, that they are dishonest or you just do notvagreewith them?
Thanks for at least confirming that you DO rely on the divided and divisive media in this country. The definition of "legitimate news sources" in your article pretends that the only sources of fake news are fake sites or social media. That completely ignores the fact that legitimate news sources are also dispensers of fake news.
My word, Mystic, you do have me scratching my head about your perspective here...
Of course I rely on the media, or how am I supposed to follow what is happening outside of my immediate experience here at home? I rely on the media but not just the media. I have all my life done a fair amount of reading; history, philosophy, business, religion along with a good many other subjects. I've had a good amount of experience in business, education, dealing with people as well. All combined that helps me to judge what we are all called upon to judge when it comes to distinguishing what is truth and what is not. As objectively as I can. This too takes learning. Lots of training and learning.
More specifically (and again specifics do help when it comes to understanding these particulars), legitimate news sites don't get a pass with respect to assumed innocence when it comes to dispensing fake news. Of course not! If you follow the news, you also see exactly where, who and how people have been found to be doing so, and if we're lucky they "pay the price." AKA fired. Brian Williams immediately comes to mind, and of course there are more than a few others.
That you think any of these examples or challenges prevents critical thinking people from distilling the truth despite the challenges confounds me. Not to say the facts and truth are always easy to recognize immediately or sometimes ever, there are still those who do far better in these respects than others.
Those who do better don't throw up their arms in the face of the challenges as you and others here always seem to be doing. The truth matters, and in many very important cases it can be had. Those who don't want to accept this simple fact are almost always those who want to believe and promote opinion and beliefs that can't be justified or proven in the same way. People who want to allow space for misrepresenting the truth. Promoting falsehoods. You can't do that sort of thing when proper scrutiny with respect to the truth of these matters is properly applied.
Who does what in these regards? Who does better than others? Who is pushing for the truth and who is arguing otherwise?
Again a rather subjective matter that we are all called upon to judge as best we are able. A subjective matter, yes, just like figuring out what truth we can learn from the media, but the truth is always there one way or another. We are not all equal in terms of who can best know the truth. Of course not. Obviously some do better than others and obviously some will believe just about anything while others are tighter tethered to what can actually be proven as truth. What cannot, and all in between. AKA reality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
