4 ms·

What is your point?

by JackFr 7y ago

What is your point?

matthewaveryusa 7y ago
You know the expression let the chips fall where they may? Well this is just stating "here are the chips." i.e the author is knowledgeable in the field and either is offering expert opinion or expert manipulation.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ImaCake 7y ago
  Not sure why you are being modded. A third option, which I consider most likely, is that this piece is doing both. The author most likely believes in what they are saying and are trying to manipulate things in a certain direction. There is noting wrong with this, and I think understanding the bias is merely a more effective way to gain more from reading this.
  - matthewaveryusa 7y ago
    no idea what modded means. That's a fair point. so you're saying that maybe the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert -- that's also possible!
    - ImaCake 7y ago
      > the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert Actually I meant the author was aware of his view and is being both manipulative while fairly forwarding his agenda. Your option would be a fourth possibility? Which would make sense since any two binary outcomes will give a 2x2 sample space for a total of 4 outcomes.
Pfhreak 7y ago
It's useful to understand the biases of an author when reading an article. We all have them, and no media is free from them. It contextualizes a piece, and it's information I found useful to my understanding of the piece.
- swimfar 7y ago
  I agree, but at the same time, it could also introduce a bias and prejudice into your perception of the article. This would be especially true if you already had strong feelings and opinions about the author. Maybe the ideal way would be to read it without any knowledge of the author. And then go back and reread it after knowing who wrote it.
  - 0xddd 7y ago
    And what better way to find out who wrote it than to scan the comments after reading the article? In all seriousness, I don't see how wilful ignorance on the first-read through is some ideal analytic strategy.
    - 1MachineElf 7y ago
      Not knowing who the author is is actually a component of an ideal analytic strategy. Same principle behind why double-blind tests have high efficacy.
      - Pfhreak 7y ago
        Reading an article is different than a double blind test. Reputation exists because it is critical shorthand when dealing with other humans. It's not always right. It's not always useful. But it shortcuts a lot of preamble. Also, most geopolitical problems aren't simple analytical problems. There isn't a 'right answer' that one can divine by approaching the space with an emotionless evaluation.
        redisman 7y ago

What is your point?

by JackFr 7y ago

What is your point?

You know the expression let the chips fall where they may? Well this is just stating "here are the chips." i.e the author is knowledgeable in the field and either is offering expert opinion or expert manipulation.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ImaCake 7y ago
Not sure why you are being modded. A third option, which I consider most likely, is that this piece is doing both. The author most likely believes in what they are saying and are trying to manipulate things in a certain direction. There is noting wrong with this, and I think understanding the bias is merely a more effective way to gain more from reading this.
- matthewaveryusa 7y ago
  no idea what modded means. That's a fair point. so you're saying that maybe the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert -- that's also possible!
  - ImaCake 7y ago
    > the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert Actually I meant the author was aware of his view and is being both manipulative while fairly forwarding his agenda. Your option would be a fourth possibility? Which would make sense since any two binary outcomes will give a 2x2 sample space for a total of 4 outcomes.

Pfhreak 7y ago

It's useful to understand the biases of an author when reading an article. We all have them, and no media is free from them. It contextualizes a piece, and it's information I found useful to my understanding of the piece.

swimfar 7y ago
I agree, but at the same time, it could also introduce a bias and prejudice into your perception of the article. This would be especially true if you already had strong feelings and opinions about the author. Maybe the ideal way would be to read it without any knowledge of the author. And then go back and reread it after knowing who wrote it.
- 0xddd 7y ago
  And what better way to find out who wrote it than to scan the comments after reading the article? In all seriousness, I don't see how wilful ignorance on the first-read through is some ideal analytic strategy.
  - 1MachineElf 7y ago
    Not knowing who the author is is actually a component of an ideal analytic strategy. Same principle behind why double-blind tests have high efficacy.
    - Pfhreak 7y ago
      Reading an article is different than a double blind test. Reputation exists because it is critical shorthand when dealing with other humans. It's not always right. It's not always useful. But it shortcuts a lot of preamble. Also, most geopolitical problems aren't simple analytical problems. There isn't a 'right answer' that one can divine by approaching the space with an emotionless evaluation.
      - redisman 7y ago