4 ms·
Your position presumes facts aren't part of how people arrive at their convictions to begin with. If you feed someone bad facts, they're going to come to bad c
by gnaritas 9y ago
Your position presumes facts aren't part of how people arrive at their convictions to begin with. If you feed someone bad facts, they're going to come to bad conclusions, how can you deny this?
> If you want judges to issue decisions you agree with you need to arrange to have those slots filled with judges who agree with you.
I want judges who will change their minds based on evidence; who will apply logic and reason, not judges who vote based on uninformed personal convictions.
- irrational 9y agoSo, you want judges that aren't human. Based on my experience, most convictions are not based on facts. If you want fact-based convictions I think we need to look at replacing human judges with AI judges.
- gnaritas 9y agoI reject your notion that humans aren't swayed by facts; categorically. You live in a world that exists because people are swayed by facts. Humans are swayed by facts, the best ones for sure, certainly not all. If you're not swayed by facts, you will not make a good judge and don't belong on the court.