4 ms·

Bias is only necessary for editorialization or conjecture regarding another's intent. Facts are facts, though omission of facts is also an issue..

pixl97 3y ago
>Facts are facts, though omission of facts is also an issue. Because you are a human, the 'facts' you acknowledge are anthropomorphic. We align our filtering of facts to the scales at which humans and society operates. When we change the scale of what we consider to be fact, then quite often what we consider to be a fact is really just an interpretation of events based on the perspective of the observer. Reality exists in a state of thermodynamic truth, that is if we could reverse the arrow of time you arrive at exactly one state at whichever slice of time. "Facts" as told by humans do not work this way the vast majority of the time. They are incomplete observations of a system using incomplete information. Time reversal of human facts can lead to situations where multiple starting states can lead to the same factual finding. Causality is uncertain without searching for even more facts, those facts which have been lost to thermodynamic scattering, leading us back to interpretation. Bias is absolutely necessary to operate on a human scale.
ElectricalUnion 3y ago
> Bias is only necessary for editorialization or conjecture regarding another's intent. I'm gonna assume you're taking a hard science approach to bias, then: It is statistically non-plausible to observe all facts in the universe, so the facts you can observe suffer from the selection bias fact sampling error. Bias is required in any useful model of the universe to explain the difference between the expected and the observed. Even assuming a non-plausible, accurate model with no biases whatsoever, such model is very likely to require high variance to encompass all fact observations and models with too much variance are useless.
- tracker1 3y ago
  So the observed never happened? If the observed was recorded from many angles, did it happen then?
  - ElectricalUnion 3y ago
    The observed happened. Definitely happened. However, you don't need "many angles". Those are too few. You need all the angles. Reaching conclusions without observing all the interactions, from all angles, in the entirety of the universe existence is, by definition, biased, so, almost all conclusions reached before the universe ends are biased.
    - tracker1 3y ago
      Would it be fair to say, you can absolutely minimize bias... at least in terms of reporting news?

pixl97 3y ago

>Facts are facts, though omission of facts is also an issue. Because you are a human, the 'facts' you acknowledge are anthropomorphic. We align our filtering of facts to the scales at which humans and society operates. When we change the scale of what we consider to be fact, then quite often what we consider to be a fact is really just an interpretation of events based on the perspective of the observer. Reality exists in a state of thermodynamic truth, that is if we could reverse the arrow of time you arrive at exactly one state at whichever slice of time. "Facts" as told by humans do not work this way the vast majority of the time. They are incomplete observations of a system using incomplete information. Time reversal of human facts can lead to situations where multiple starting states can lead to the same factual finding. Causality is uncertain without searching for even more facts, those facts which have been lost to thermodynamic scattering, leading us back to interpretation. Bias is absolutely necessary to operate on a human scale.

ElectricalUnion 3y ago

> Bias is only necessary for editorialization or conjecture regarding another's intent. I'm gonna assume you're taking a hard science approach to bias, then: It is statistically non-plausible to observe all facts in the universe, so the facts you can observe suffer from the selection bias fact sampling error. Bias is required in any useful model of the universe to explain the difference between the expected and the observed. Even assuming a non-plausible, accurate model with no biases whatsoever, such model is very likely to require high variance to encompass all fact observations and models with too much variance are useless.

tracker1 3y ago
So the observed never happened? If the observed was recorded from many angles, did it happen then?
- ElectricalUnion 3y ago
  The observed happened. Definitely happened. However, you don't need "many angles". Those are too few. You need all the angles. Reaching conclusions without observing all the interactions, from all angles, in the entirety of the universe existence is, by definition, biased, so, almost all conclusions reached before the universe ends are biased.
  - tracker1 3y ago
    Would it be fair to say, you can absolutely minimize bias... at least in terms of reporting news?