Agreed, but nyan_sandwich touches on an interesting point.

Certainly, there are lots of situations where I have one set of cognitive structures that encourage me to behave one way (say, eating ice cream, or experimenting to discover what's actually true about my environment, or whatever) and a different set encouraging me to behave a different way (say, avoiding empty calories, or having high confidence in what I was taught as a child, or whatever).

It seems to me that when I call one of those structures a "bias" I'm suggesting two things: first, that I don't endorse it, and second, that it's relatively broad in applicability.

But that in turn suggests that I can eliminate a bias simply by endorsing its conclusions, which is.. not uncontroversial.

If they conflict, one or the other is currently a 'bias'. You get to decide which one you like more.

Is eating ice-cream more important than your desire to stay healthy? You must overcome your desire to stay healthy.

Is staying healthy more important than eating ice-cream? Then you must overcome the desire to eat ice-cream.

'bias' is a fuzzy category referring to the corner of the conflict*value space where value is low and conflict with other values is high. Stretched all the way over to ice-cream and health, it starts to lose meaning. Just talk about which one you want to overcome.