Bias or Opinion?

[arthwollipot]

In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.

In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.

The process went something like this:

A: I think {opinion} and this is why.

B: Well you're clearly biased.

A: How and in what way am I biased?

B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.

I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.

It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.

What do you think?

 

[phiwum]

In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.

In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.

The process went something like this:

A: I think {opinion} and this is why.

B: Well you're clearly biased.

A: How and in what way am I biased?

B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.

I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.

It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.

What do you think?

If it played out as you said, then it appears to be a matter of supporting one's opinion, but of course it's hard to know whether your account is accurate without a link.

 

[Elaedith]

People tend to be afflicted with the misconception that they themselves can see reality objectively and without bias. Therefore anyone who has access to the same information but disagrees with them must be irrational or biased.

 

[Navigator]

In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.

In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.

The process went something like this:

A: I think {opinion} and this is why.

B: Well you're clearly biased.

A: How and in what way am I biased?

B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.

I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.

It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.

What do you think?

I think our opinions all surf the wave of bias. Opinion is the outward flow of an inward bias. Opinion derives from thought and thoughts are shaped by bias.

Belief systems are a product of unchecked bias, and beliefs are designed to help the individual remain in the bias of their dogmas...dogmas are like wood which has turned to stone.

Bias is pretty natural but one clearly has to make sure that these are fluid and changeable constructs in order to maintain the position of openess and willingness to 'go there' in your mind and try to see things from the perspective of the one you are arguing with.

As far as I can tell, bias and opinion are not polar or separate internal institutions of thinking. They are the same thing seen differently, 'tis all.

 

[Giordano]

In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.

In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.

The process went something like this:

A: I think {opinion} and this is why.

B: Well you're clearly biased.

A: How and in what way am I biased?

B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.

I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.
It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.

What do you think?

I agree with your (highlighted) interpretation.

 

[simonxlong]

In another thread (which I have now put on Ignore for the sake of my blood pressure) I was recently accused of bias.

In my estimation, I was expressing an opinion on the subject of the thread, and I was supporting my opinion and explaining my reasoning by using analogies. But according to one poster, this constituted "bias" on my part, and was therefore invalid.

The process went something like this:

A: I think {opinion} and this is why.

B: Well you're clearly biased.

A: How and in what way am I biased?

B: You're biased towards {opinion} and you're just trying to defend that bias.

I don't think expressing and supporting an opinion constitutes bias. But am I wrong about that? Was this person correct in calling me out? I think that if every opinion is a bias, it makes expressing and supporting opinions fallacious. Bias, to me, is an a priori position that one constructs arguments to support, not a position that one comes to through reason. But what is the real difference between "constructing arguments to support" a position and "explaining the reasoning behind" that position? In my opinion (there it is again), the result takes precedence in the former, and the process takes precedence in the latter.

It is worth noting at this point that the subject on which I was expressing an opinion was one of subjective judgement, and not one that could be qualitatively measured.

What do you think?

Based on your description of events in your post, I don't think what you are referring to is bias, at least not in the negative connotation which your opponent seems to be using the term.

In my understanding, bias means that you are choosing an opinion based on preconceived points of view which predispose you to choosing a particular side without weighing the evidence or arguments related to the actual issue at hand. For an example, say I don't like the Republican Party in general. I would be inclined to dismiss anything they say out of hand, even if I might have actually agreed with that particular position had it come from another, neutral source and I had weighed the issue and the evidence fairly. Bias is letting your preconceived, often ill thought out, notions form your opinions instead of the evidence.

 

[arthwollipot]

If it played out as you said, then it appears to be a matter of supporting one's opinion, but of course it's hard to know whether your account is accurate without a link.

That is fair, but I deliberately wanted to separate this discussion from the actual argument itself.

What I reported was my interpretation of what happened. The other person in the discussion will undoubtedly have their own.

 

[Dani]

It was obviously gratuitous. Are you licking your wounds or genuinely asking? The other person was clearly confrontational, and by being so, sloppy in the way he articulated his accusation. I don't think this merits abandoning a thread in which you had something to say.

 

[Navigator]

That is fair, but I deliberately wanted to separate this discussion from the actual argument itself.

Yet without the example, how is it possible to ascertain if what you regard as your opinion isn't in fact loaded with bias?

What I reported was my interpretation of what happened. The other person in the discussion will undoubtedly have their own.

Either way, your interpretation in the argument might be an opinion heavily loaded with bias.

 

[Thermal]

Yet without the example, how is it possible to ascertain if what you regard as your opinion isn't in fact loaded with bias?



Either way, your interpretation in the argument might be an opinion heavily loaded with bias.

An observers view of the argument (pretty sure what it is):

A: I have primary opinion (x) and related but separate secondary opinion .
B: That's biased. is inconsistent with (x), so you show irrational bias for (x).
A: They're separate elements of the same subject. I make a clear distinction.
B: I don't. Therefore you are biased.

 

[Horatius]

If simply having an opinion, no matter how well supported by evidence and logic can be dismissed as "bias", then we can never have any sort of rational conversation, can we? That seems clearly inane to me, so we need to somehow distinguish a reasonable "opinion" from an irrational "bias" if we're to make any progress.

I think this here is the key:

...even if I might have actually agreed with that particular position had it come from another, neutral source and I had weighed the issue and the evidence fairly. Bias is letting your preconceived, often ill thought out, notions form your opinions instead of the evidence.

The trick is how to determine if you're "letting your preconceived, often ill thought out, notions form your opinions instead of the evidence." Just listing reasons probably isn't enough, as even the most biased person can list "reasons", even if they're mistakes or falsehoods. What we need to add is the feature of being falsifiable. If you can provide a reasonable, and reasonably complete, list of things which would cause you to change your position, you're likely expressing an honest opinion, and not an irrational bias.

 

[Navigator]

An observers view of the argument (pretty sure what it is):

A: I have primary opinion (x) and related but separate secondary opinion .
B: That's biased. is inconsistent with (x), so you show irrational bias for (x).
A: They're separate elements of the same subject. I make a clear distinction.
B: I don't. Therefore you are biased.

If simply having an opinion, no matter how well supported by evidence and logic can be dismissed as "bias", then we can never have any sort of rational conversation, can we? That seems clearly inane to me, so we need to somehow distinguish a reasonable "opinion" from an irrational "bias" if we're to make any progress.

I think this here is the key:





The trick is how to determine if you're "letting your preconceived, often ill thought out, notions form your opinions instead of the evidence." Just listing reasons probably isn't enough, as even the most biased person can list "reasons", even if they're mistakes or falsehoods. What we need to add is the feature of being falsifiable. If you can provide a reasonable, and reasonably complete, list of things which would cause you to change your position, you're likely expressing an honest opinion, and not an irrational bias.

Again it is all dependent upon subjective experience. There are no examples offered here of 'opinion' in which we can then examine critically to see if bias exists or not.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yet without the example, how is it possible to ascertain if what you regard as your opinion isn't in fact loaded with bias?

Can we not establish general guidelines without having a direct example? I think we can.

Either way, your interpretation in the argument might be an opinion heavily loaded with bias.

Indeed, that is a danger, which is why I was concerned. Once I can be reassured that merely having an opinion is not inherently a biased position, I can examine my position to see if I can determine any bias there.

 

[Navigator]

Can we not establish general guidelines without having a direct example? I think we can.

But that opinion may be motivated through bias.

Indeed, that is a danger, which is why I was concerned. Once I can be reassured that merely having an opinion is not inherently a biased position, I can examine my position to see if I can determine any bias there.

All very subjective I am sure you should agree.

You are asking for other opinions so that through these you might decide if your opinions are or are not founded in bias.

Most have said 'nope, opinions are not bias' and I have said 'I think our opinions all surf the wave of bias'.

Which of these is more attractive to you...that you lean towards...?

 

[bluesjnr]

Can we not establish general guidelines without having a direct example? I think we can.

Then again, you might be biased.



(I'm joking!)

 

[Crocoshark]

Aren't opinions inherently biased?

I mean, opinions are made up of biases. It's your general subjective inclination on something made up of smaller subjective inclinations.

Bias is only a problem when it influences what you believe to be facts.

It also doesn't sound helpful to say something is biased without clarifying how. Does the person think the you're viewing things through nostalgia? Prejudice from a bad experience? A preference for the familiar or aversion to the unknown? Name a bias and than you can discuss how they might view the thing differently without said bias. Just calling something biased isn't really helpful.

 

[Beerina]

B.F. Skinner. Ignore the statements and follow the behaviors. It's all memes driving behaviors.

 

[Thermal]

Aren't opinions inherently biased?
I mean, opinions are made up of biases. It's your general subjective inclination on something made up of smaller subjective inclinations.

Bias is only a problem when it influences what you believe to be facts.

It also doesn't sound helpful to say something is biased without clarifying how. Does the person think the you're viewing things through nostalgia? Prejudice from a bad experience? A preference for the familiar or aversion to the unknown? Name a bias and than you can discuss how they might view the thing differently without said bias. Just calling something biased isn't really helpful.

You don't allow for an unbiased opinion? One arrived at objectively, but perhaps from a particular perspective? Bias should only kick in if you refuse to see another POV.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Again it is all dependent upon subjective experience. There are no examples offered here of 'opinion' in which we can then examine critically to see if bias exists or not.

But that opinion may be motivated through bias.



All very subjective I am sure you should agree.

How could opinion and bias be anything other than subjective? I don't think using criteria of objectivity or subjectivity are very useful when discussing two things that are, by their very nature, both subjective.

 

[arthwollipot]

Aren't opinions inherently biased?

I mean, opinions are made up of biases. It's your general subjective inclination on something made up of smaller subjective inclinations.

Bias is only a problem when it influences what you believe to be facts.

No, I don't think opinions have to be inherently biased. Different people perceive different facts or have different interpretations of observed situations. It is not necessary for those opinions to be coloured by a priori assumptions, which is what bias is.

It also doesn't sound helpful to say something is biased without clarifying how. Does the person think the you're viewing things through nostalgia? Prejudice from a bad experience? A preference for the familiar or aversion to the unknown? Name a bias and than you can discuss how they might view the thing differently without said bias. Just calling something biased isn't really helpful.

Yeah, in this case it was explained that I am biased towards my opinion, when actually I was attempting to justify my opinion and explain why I hold that opinion. It struck me as being, at best, circular.

Then again, you might be biased.

Lol.