James_Miller comments on Should we be biased? - Less Wrong

-13 Post author: James_Miller 27 April 2009 03:42PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (23)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cousin_it 27 April 2009 03:57:35PM *  3 points [-]

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".

Comment author: James_Miller 27 April 2009 04:02:06PM 0 points [-]

"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.

Comment author: timtyler 27 April 2009 06:51:25PM 2 points [-]

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