7 ms·

How does members of the HN crowd try to combat this? Or is it just another exercise in futility where the actual exercise is just part of the thing that make m

by maCDzP 4y ago

How does members of the HN crowd try to combat this? Or is it just another exercise in futility where the actual exercise is just part of the thing that make me biased in the first place? I’ll go first. I see a therapist every other week. I hope that gives me an outsiders point of view. But I think I have identified a way to know where my biases are could be strong. When I get a really uneasy feeling when I start to think about making changes in a certain area. And I don’t know if it’s a rational fear or just a sunk cost fallacy. What I find really scary is that I have hard time understanding if I am just fooling myself or being rational. Because it’s always my own mind coming up with explanations, so the actual process looks the same to me. I read a book called “Quit” recently and it gave me a lot to think about regarding biases and quitting different endeavors. Can recommend.

SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
I would say isn’t it useful to simply acknowledge you can be deeply flawed all the time and your experiences of reality will always be slanted with your subjective opinions on how society works, that everyone else is also doing the same thing, and continue onwards anyways? There’s no way to escape our own imperfections. We have some tools to help us mitigate them, but they will always be there.
- brookst 4y ago
  That seems fairly defeatist. I’ve gotten better at some things I used to be terrible at, and it took work to do so. And I’m happier for it, while still being plenty imperfect.
  - SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
    I never said to stop working at it. I’m merely pointing out that the knowledge that one is a personally unsolveably flawed human being doesn’t have to cause uneasiness.
    - brookst 4y ago
      Then apologies for misunderstanding your point!
jvanderbot 4y ago
I try to fully rationalize the opposing viewpoints. To the point that I cannot disdain anyone for taking those viewpoints because I completely understand why they would think that way, and can see my own self from their POV. It does not at all prevent me from having bias, but it at least, with effort, on a case by case basis, lets me adopt someone else's bias. After all, there is no unbiased person so what's the point?
- csours 4y ago
  > I try to fully rationalize the opposing viewpoints. Edit: "Both Sides"-ing an issue can be dangerous. Many times, there is actual harm on one side, and mere discomfort on the other. You may not be describing "both sides"-ing; but this could be read that way. I would say it as "identify the deeply held beliefs that got this person to their viewpoint" Previous statement: This can be dangerous, depending on how it is done. I would say it as "identify the deeply held beliefs that got this person to their viewpoint"
  - jvanderbot 4y ago
    I don't think being able to hold opposing viewpoints in my head is ever dangerous. Understanding the chain of logic that leads from, for example, some religious fundamentalism to misogyny does not imply I'm going to keep my girls out of school, it just means I get why they have that fucked up opinion: they grew up around it, it feels natural to them, their elders support it with scripture so it becomes sacred, etc etc. It just helps understand how deep it goes, and therefore how challenging it might be to persuade someone out of it. It doesn't change my own beliefs on the matter.
  - lumb63 4y ago
    To the contrary, I think your approach leads to, rather than understanding, identifying. In my opinion, it can be a little degrading to have one’s system of beliefs broken down to “this person believes X therefore Y”; there is probably a lot more going on in some people’s minds. The best approach is probably somewhere in the middle. I can think of instances in people i know where they have deeply held beliefs that they don’t challenge that lead them to all sorts of conclusions. But I also know people who have deliberated on topics in depth to reach the conclusions they have. That is not to say that they are without bias, but their viewpoints are consequences of more than just deeply held beliefs.
bheadmaster 4y ago
Knowledge itself is a bias against things you don't know.
- bugbuddy 4y ago
  This is not what bias means.
  - brookst 4y ago
    How about my bias against being electrocuted?
    - Koshkin 4y ago
      You are entitled to have your own opinion on this.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    Thanks for informing me that my understanding of the word differs from yours. Unfortunately, that information on its own is not very useful to me. Would you care to also tell me your understanding of the word, so I can figure out whether I need to change my understanding or not?
csours 4y ago
The human mind appears to have evolved in a tribal system, and it appears to be predisposed to tribal thinking. As for myself, I try to think of my tribe as all of humanity. You're all my cousins; some of you are knuckleheads, some of you are dangerous, but you're all my cousins. I like the book "The Righteous Mind". It took me a month to read; it's emotionally difficult, not intellectually difficult. You can't blame people for their gender or skin tone; you also can't blame them for how they were raised - people pick up deeply held beliefs as children that are very hard to see or address. > What I find really scary is that I have hard time understanding if I am just fooling myself or being rational. Because it’s always my own mind coming up with explanations, so the actual process looks the same to me. The mind is a rationalizing system. It makes things you do feel rational. After I left organized religion, I fell in love with rational skepticism. Then I found that most public "skepticism" is just debunking, not gathering evidence for things you should believe in; and that most "rationality" is just post-hoc rationalization of existing beliefs.
- wanderingstan 4y ago
  Seconding the book "The Righteous Mind". Was hard to accept the point that landed against “my” usual political side, but his point are valid, and only more applicable since it was published ten (?) years ago.
  - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
    Excellent book, highly recommended as well.
- codethief 4y ago
  > The human mind appears to have evolved in a tribal system, and it appears to be predisposed to tribal thinking. +1 I learned about this was when someone posted this article on HN some years ago: https://web.archive.org/web/20200808051003/https://nautil.us/issue/55/trust/why-your-brain-hates-other-people-rp https://web.archive.org/web/20200808051003/https://nautil.us...
- maCDzP 4y ago
  Hehe, I like the thought of having and being cousin knucklehead. I’ll have to check out the book you recommended. Speaking of righteousness, I have noticed in myself that it’s a very addictive feeling. I get off on it. I don’t think that’s a good thing though.
IIAOPSW 4y ago
how do you know if its all a dream? Because the top doesn't stop spinning. You need a top for testing rationality. Here's a nearly definitional one: you're being rationale when your explanation convinces people other than just you.
- robgibbons 4y ago
  Being convincing does not equal rational. There are many logical fallacies that are convincing on the surface but don't stand up to rational scrutiny.
  - NateEag 4y ago
    Worth pointing out that many logical fallacies are legitimately persuasive, acceptable arguments. They're fallacies because they're not acceptable in a rigorous proof, not because they're entirely without any place in thinking through a problem.
  - IIAOPSW 4y ago
    Define what it means to be rational in a way that isn't dependent on a consensus among other rational persons. Even science comes down to peer review.
kilgnad 4y ago
People on hackernews especially suffer from this because a lot of programmers tie their identity to being smart. Its the worst place to ask for advice against this because the people answering you are likely the most confidently biased people. The happier and more confident someone is the more biased they tend to be. The less confident someone is the less biased they tend to be. Because you use the word "scared" I'm thinking you're not a confident person and therefore you're highly highly unbiased. As a human, to live a happy life, we are evolved to be more biased then not. It is the cruel irony in life that your quest to seek the unbiased truth leads to less happiness. I'm too lazy to cite this but there is actual research showing this. People who lie to themselves tend to be happier and more successful and people who are more honest with themselves... Tend to suffer from depression. If you don't believe a word I say, then great, you're doing well. And you're really smart! Leave me a snappy reply showing how you disagree then go on and live your life. If you agree with this post, then I'm sorry.
- Koshkin 4y ago
  > programmers tie their identity to being smart And not just programmers themselves: more than once I have heard a manager say, Let’s ask a programmer, they are smart!
smiley1437 4y ago
A little humility goes a long way for correcting biases
- asdf123wtf 4y ago
  Here's my little folk "wisdom" addendum to your great point: * Try to replace any judginess you feel, with curiosity (Easier said than done - but a little humility is a great first step towards getting to that curious state of mind) Curiosity places understanding something ahead of justifying something. It makes self-interrogation easier and less threatening to the ego. It makes engaging with those who hold differing beliefs more about understanding/exploring, and less like doing battle. That's my theory anyways, but it could be my bias talking. And I fail at taking my own advice, often. ;P
evv555 4y ago
>How does members of the HN crowd try to combat this? I think what can be lost in these conversations is the differentiation of a cognitive capacity and the drives to use that capacity. What are the conditions that have lead to your drive for empathic perspective taking? What are these conditions and are these conditions scalable to the world at large?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by maCDzP 4y ago

SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago

I would say isn’t it useful to simply acknowledge you can be deeply flawed all the time and your experiences of reality will always be slanted with your subjective opinions on how society works, that everyone else is also doing the same thing, and continue onwards anyways? There’s no way to escape our own imperfections. We have some tools to help us mitigate them, but they will always be there.

brookst 4y ago
That seems fairly defeatist. I’ve gotten better at some things I used to be terrible at, and it took work to do so. And I’m happier for it, while still being plenty imperfect.
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
  I never said to stop working at it. I’m merely pointing out that the knowledge that one is a personally unsolveably flawed human being doesn’t have to cause uneasiness.
  - brookst 4y ago
    Then apologies for misunderstanding your point!

jvanderbot 4y ago

I try to fully rationalize the opposing viewpoints. To the point that I cannot disdain anyone for taking those viewpoints because I completely understand why they would think that way, and can see my own self from their POV. It does not at all prevent me from having bias, but it at least, with effort, on a case by case basis, lets me adopt someone else's bias. After all, there is no unbiased person so what's the point?

csours 4y ago
> I try to fully rationalize the opposing viewpoints. Edit: "Both Sides"-ing an issue can be dangerous. Many times, there is actual harm on one side, and mere discomfort on the other. You may not be describing "both sides"-ing; but this could be read that way. I would say it as "identify the deeply held beliefs that got this person to their viewpoint" Previous statement: This can be dangerous, depending on how it is done. I would say it as "identify the deeply held beliefs that got this person to their viewpoint"
- jvanderbot 4y ago
  I don't think being able to hold opposing viewpoints in my head is ever dangerous. Understanding the chain of logic that leads from, for example, some religious fundamentalism to misogyny does not imply I'm going to keep my girls out of school, it just means I get why they have that fucked up opinion: they grew up around it, it feels natural to them, their elders support it with scripture so it becomes sacred, etc etc. It just helps understand how deep it goes, and therefore how challenging it might be to persuade someone out of it. It doesn't change my own beliefs on the matter.
- lumb63 4y ago
  To the contrary, I think your approach leads to, rather than understanding, identifying. In my opinion, it can be a little degrading to have one’s system of beliefs broken down to “this person believes X therefore Y”; there is probably a lot more going on in some people’s minds. The best approach is probably somewhere in the middle. I can think of instances in people i know where they have deeply held beliefs that they don’t challenge that lead them to all sorts of conclusions. But I also know people who have deliberated on topics in depth to reach the conclusions they have. That is not to say that they are without bias, but their viewpoints are consequences of more than just deeply held beliefs.

bheadmaster 4y ago

Knowledge itself is a bias against things you don't know.

bugbuddy 4y ago
This is not what bias means.
- brookst 4y ago
  How about my bias against being electrocuted?
  - Koshkin 4y ago
    You are entitled to have your own opinion on this.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  Thanks for informing me that my understanding of the word differs from yours. Unfortunately, that information on its own is not very useful to me. Would you care to also tell me your understanding of the word, so I can figure out whether I need to change my understanding or not?

csours 4y ago

The human mind appears to have evolved in a tribal system, and it appears to be predisposed to tribal thinking. As for myself, I try to think of my tribe as all of humanity. You're all my cousins; some of you are knuckleheads, some of you are dangerous, but you're all my cousins. I like the book "The Righteous Mind". It took me a month to read; it's emotionally difficult, not intellectually difficult. You can't blame people for their gender or skin tone; you also can't blame them for how they were raised - people pick up deeply held beliefs as children that are very hard to see or address. > What I find really scary is that I have hard time understanding if I am just fooling myself or being rational. Because it’s always my own mind coming up with explanations, so the actual process looks the same to me. The mind is a rationalizing system. It makes things you do feel rational. After I left organized religion, I fell in love with rational skepticism. Then I found that most public "skepticism" is just debunking, not gathering evidence for things you should believe in; and that most "rationality" is just post-hoc rationalization of existing beliefs.

wanderingstan 4y ago
Seconding the book "The Righteous Mind". Was hard to accept the point that landed against “my” usual political side, but his point are valid, and only more applicable since it was published ten (?) years ago.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
  Excellent book, highly recommended as well.
codethief 4y ago
> The human mind appears to have evolved in a tribal system, and it appears to be predisposed to tribal thinking. +1 I learned about this was when someone posted this article on HN some years ago: https://web.archive.org/web/20200808051003/https://nautil.us/issue/55/trust/why-your-brain-hates-other-people-rp https://web.archive.org/web/20200808051003/https://nautil.us...
maCDzP 4y ago
Hehe, I like the thought of having and being cousin knucklehead. I’ll have to check out the book you recommended. Speaking of righteousness, I have noticed in myself that it’s a very addictive feeling. I get off on it. I don’t think that’s a good thing though.

IIAOPSW 4y ago

how do you know if its all a dream? Because the top doesn't stop spinning. You need a top for testing rationality. Here's a nearly definitional one: you're being rationale when your explanation convinces people other than just you.

robgibbons 4y ago
Being convincing does not equal rational. There are many logical fallacies that are convincing on the surface but don't stand up to rational scrutiny.
- NateEag 4y ago
  Worth pointing out that many logical fallacies are legitimately persuasive, acceptable arguments. They're fallacies because they're not acceptable in a rigorous proof, not because they're entirely without any place in thinking through a problem.
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  Define what it means to be rational in a way that isn't dependent on a consensus among other rational persons. Even science comes down to peer review.

kilgnad 4y ago

People on hackernews especially suffer from this because a lot of programmers tie their identity to being smart. Its the worst place to ask for advice against this because the people answering you are likely the most confidently biased people. The happier and more confident someone is the more biased they tend to be. The less confident someone is the less biased they tend to be. Because you use the word "scared" I'm thinking you're not a confident person and therefore you're highly highly unbiased. As a human, to live a happy life, we are evolved to be more biased then not. It is the cruel irony in life that your quest to seek the unbiased truth leads to less happiness. I'm too lazy to cite this but there is actual research showing this. People who lie to themselves tend to be happier and more successful and people who are more honest with themselves... Tend to suffer from depression. If you don't believe a word I say, then great, you're doing well. And you're really smart! Leave me a snappy reply showing how you disagree then go on and live your life. If you agree with this post, then I'm sorry.

Koshkin 4y ago
> programmers tie their identity to being smart And not just programmers themselves: more than once I have heard a manager say, Let’s ask a programmer, they are smart!

smiley1437 4y ago

A little humility goes a long way for correcting biases

asdf123wtf 4y ago
Here's my little folk "wisdom" addendum to your great point: * Try to replace any judginess you feel, with curiosity (Easier said than done - but a little humility is a great first step towards getting to that curious state of mind) Curiosity places understanding something ahead of justifying something. It makes self-interrogation easier and less threatening to the ego. It makes engaging with those who hold differing beliefs more about understanding/exploring, and less like doing battle. That's my theory anyways, but it could be my bias talking. And I fail at taking my own advice, often. ;P

evv555 4y ago

>How does members of the HN crowd try to combat this? I think what can be lost in these conversations is the differentiation of a cognitive capacity and the drives to use that capacity. What are the conditions that have lead to your drive for empathic perspective taking? What are these conditions and are these conditions scalable to the world at large?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]