Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)
I love the martial arts and especially karate, it gives me something I thoroughly enjoy doing, teaching and studying along with all the writing I do on the subject. It is an awesome way that benefits my every day life and has been the impetus of self-change in my life. I find connections, you can say biases if you wish, from it to almost all things in some way or form or another. It has taught me how to relate to one thing as representative of that other thing while allowing me to synthesize something unique about that other thing. Make sense?
Debate is a good thing as long as communications flow between parties and it remains respectful, relevant and useful to either or all parties involved. It is that one thing not often related to but an intricate part of our species needs toward survival - in all forms, etc. The only true way to unbias (this may not be a word, but you get the idea, right?) one’s biases is to find an open-mind, gather around as many experts in a subject as you can, all with as diverse experiences possible and then gather around a table, pop a beer top, have a drink that is a social brotherhood type of activity and then begin to discuss the topics of concern.
In many subjects debate rises up when one expert or group of experts present some factual and/or historical piece of data. The other expert or group of experts, not within the first group, believes that the first groups piece of data is not accurate, incorrect or just plain wrong. I liken it to the age old debate on rank, the criteria on historical lineage type stuff, promotions and other such things in the martial communities, and how the system and/or style is practiced such as traditional, classical or modern. More often than not, rarely does the debate come to a mutual accepted and valid consensus resulting in change of one or both groups.
So, when I was reading a blog article today on cognizant dissonance and confirmation bias on a particular subject in debate the following quotes, slightly adjusted to meet my biases - uh, needs - as example of how we humans get ourselves caught up in such ongoing debates causing a separation of a group, such as a style that breaks off and separates its members, into factions of say, the system or style.
The semi-quote:
Tell me why you should not automatically trust the expert in this situation. Assume the following three things ARE true. What’s missing?
- The source is the best expert in the world on martial arts/karate.
- The source currently teaches, trains and practices in the discipline or system or style.
- The source is a great communicator, answers all of your questions, etc.
See what’s missing yet? The thing that is missing is that you can’t know what the expert didn’t tell you. If you are not an expert in the field yourself, how could you possibly know what has been left out? Even if you are an expert in the field, you also cannot know what you don’t know.
You also don’t know if the expert is suffering from cognitive dissonance. It would look exactly the same to you. And cognitive dissonance is common to all humans, including experts.
I’m also confused by the fact that apparently there is more than one expert that gets the “right” answer for the subject situation, etc. Shouldn’t there only be one?
My position on the experts information is that BOTH sides of the debate are completely credible to the people already on their side, thanks to confirmation bias. But that’s where the persuasion ends. Neither side has the tools or talent to sell their beliefs to the other side in any wholesale way.
If you are frustrated with the people who are on the other side of the debate, no matter which side that is, I think you should give them some slack. There is no way for this sort of information to be credibly conveyed to human beings. And the problem is not always on the receiving end.
- Scott Adams, excerpts from his article, “Could a Climate Science Expert Change Your Opinion?”
Bibliography (Click the link)
No comments:
Post a Comment