= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cousin_it comments on Should we be biased? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (23)
The definition of bias given in the article is, I believe, quite different from the definition accepted here. LW/OB largely thinks "bias" means inaccurate opinion, not socially unacceptable opinion. There's no natural law saying negative opinions or pre-formed opinions are always inaccurate. But they often are, especially when we're thinking about clumps of people different from "us".
Now for my personal answers to your questions, that may or may not be shared by others here. Yes, you should keep the capability to be biased if you want to function more efficiently. Yes, you should hide it for signaling reasons. Yes, you should take into account the irrationality of other people's biases and reduce your own biases to an evidentially justified level of negative (or positive) "stereotype", but no closer to "neutrality".
Here, the word "pre-formed" is doing the work of saying that the negative opinion is not evidentially justified ... i.e., the negative opinion is inaccurate. So the University's definition and LW's definition aren't that different.
To explain my downvote: your leap from "pre-formed" to "inaccurate" is too poorly justified. Humans hold many accurate pre-formed (even inborn) opinions, like "being thirsty for a long time is bad for you".
I'm glad you explained the reason for your downvote, because it's easy to argue with.
I was not asserting that "pre-formed" means "inaccurate". I was just explaining that in this context, the University chose the words "pre-formed" to convey this meaning. Don't blame the messenger.
Later edit: If I was saying that "pre-formed" has the same meaning as "inaccurate" then why would I have used the nuanced phrase, "does the work of saying"?
"The definition of bias given in the article is, I believe, quite different from the definition accepted here. "
You are probably right but it is very dangerous to define a word differently than most other people do when that word has extreme negative connotations for many people.
Talk to the University of Chicago about that - they are the ones who need to get a dictionary:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bias