“Limited Information is really how we err. But it is also how we think.” The act of actively combating our inductive bias in Kathryn Schulz’s Evidence In Kathryn Schulz’s essay, “Evidence”, the argument of the essay follows various situations brought up by Schulz, showing that people should take a positive approach to being wrong, and accept our error-prone nature, rather than obsessing with a perfect inadvertently-free ideal. Schulz ties together a lot of strong evidence, but fades back from a clear conclusion, steering the readers toward a relationship between error and the self. She further studies moral transformation on conversations, our attachment to a view wrongly identified due to our pre conceived opinion off prior experience. Schulz …show more content…
Each person develops “Specific and formal ideas about it-what kind of information qualifies, how to gather it, how to evaluate it”(364). Schulz uses Augustine’s words in the essay as Augustine has a similar way to perceive evidence. “Believing things based on paltry evidence is the engine that drives the entire miraculous machinery of human cognition”(364). Schulz adds a interesting multiple choice quiz into the chapter prove a point between man and machine: “Human beings… have no trouble answering these questions because we don’t care about what is logically valid and theoretically possible. We care about what is probable… we choose the most likely answer to any given question based on the kinds of things we have (and haven’t) experienced in comparable situations before” (366). That test shows how us humans use our pre-conceived notions through our inductive reasoning to predict the output of a situation. Inductive reasoning is a careful understanding of evidence, but because it is so quick, it opens the window for error. What makes our minds great is also what makes us …show more content…
With inductive reasoning, jumping to conclusions is what the process calls for, but what Schulz is getting at is not the problem of jumping to conclusions; it is the problem of not overturning the false accusations of the assumption, thus creating stereotypes. Schulz expresses the frustration with the stubbornness behind stereotypes by exclaiming, “If the stereotypes we generate based on the small amount of evidence could be overturned by equally small amounts of counterevidence, this particular feature of inductive reasoning wouldn’t be terribly worrisome” (371). This problem that’s birthed from inductive reasoning is what Schulz wants us to “actively combat our inductive biases: to deliberately seek out evidence that challenges our beliefs, and to take seriously such evidence when we come across it”(373). Schulz wants us to challenge evidence when confronted rather than fall into the pitfalls of ignorant assumptions. Nearing the end of the chapter, Schulz warns that with attending to counterevidence is not hard, its conscious cultivation that’s the important key, without that key, “our strongest beliefs are determined by mere accidents of fate”(377). There is a threshold of new evidence above which our opinions would be amended, but what Schulz repeatedly brings us is that in many cases, that the threshold is not
Why is it so difficult for us to admit that we’re wrong? Tavris and Aronson (2007) wrote that instead of backing down and apologizing, people have a tendency to continue to justify their actions even when irrefutable evidence is staring them in the face. They are guilty. They know they are guilty. They and everyone else can see the evidence that they are guilty. But they continue to justify their actions.
Additionally, Carr argues that the lack of our critical thinking skills causes less knowledge to be created because...
In a society where one must often compromise their thoughts and beliefs to fit into the social norms of society, one must be careful not to alter their views and morals too much. The consequences can be devastating. Experiments from Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch, and Philip Zimbardo all show the effects and consequences the modification of ones morals and beliefs can have. We must learn from the past and attempt to keep these experiments in mind when our morals or beliefs are on the line.
...process of correct opinion being “tied down”, as I have illustrated previously in the essay. Clearly Augustine has had deeper understanding of evil and goodness, which ought to be knowledge since he builds up such understanding on his own explanation.
In Douglas’ article, she argues that “non-epistemic values are a required part of the internal aspects of scientific reasoning for cases where inductive risk includes risk of non-epistemic consequences (Douglas, p. 559). She continues on to explain the foundation for the term inductive risk, and how it came about. “Inductive risk, a term first used by Hempel [in 1965, it] is the chance that one will be wrong in accepting (or rejecting) a scientific hypothesis” (Douglas, p. 561). Apparently, traditional philosophers contend the values act as a precursor to scientific arguments. However, Hempel believed that these values should
As long as civilized societies have existed, hypocrisy and discrimination have been an unassailable piece of each of them. A punishment for an offense has always been determined by the severity of the action, which inherently depends on the culture of the people. However, the presence of some level of judgement of others has remained inevitable. Many would like to ask the question “Why does this feeling of entitlement to pass judgement exist when everything is subjective to each person’s own morals?” One might ponder that very enigmatic phenomenon. However, this essay will focus on why and how a person should overcome the inevitable mistakes they will make in their lifetime. The word itself seems much too cliche, but as these literary
Clifford’s arguments for this conclusion is that if we are gullible enough to believe something without evidence then we are not only harming our individual credibility and intellect but also polluting the rest of society...
Natasha Trethewey uses descriptive imagery of bodies to describe personal and historical unjustifiable acts, specifically through racism and abuse. In the poem “What Is Evidence”, Tretheway depicts her mother’s brutal injuries in order to demonstrate the injustice of her mother’s abusive relationship. Trethewey's mother hides her “fleeting bruises” and her “splintered clavicle, pierced temporal,” so her daughter will not carry the burden of her own abuse by her husband. Specifically choosing to hide the wounds, Trethewey shows her mother’s attempt to protect her daughter from experiencing any of the pain, physical and emotional, that she constantly feels. Trethewey describes her mother’s bones as “thin” to exhibit the result of her step-father’s
" Strong readers often read critically, weighing, for example, an author claims and interpretations against evidence-evidence provided by the author in the text, evidence drawn from other sources, or the evidence that is assumed to be part of a reader's own knowledge and experience."(p.12)
We amass singular opinions, qualities, and presumptions that influence how we approach our day to day existence. As rational beings we are faced with conflicting thoughts. Its beneficial to consider these clashing contemplations since it enhances our “mental dexterity” (Lecture, September 29, 2016), moral reasoning, and our ability to critically think. But its troublesome through the concept of “cognitive dissonance” (ChangingMinds.org). This can be resolved through consistent presentation of new thoughts that makes enough internal clash to cause a change or revision in beliefs.
These assumptions change how we perceive others. The short story named "The Wife's Story" by Ursula K. Le Guin is a perfect example of this. It is a story about a family whose dad has a problem of turning into a monster "[a]lways … in the dark of the moon" (Le Guin 4). As the story goes on the reader makes an assumption the this is a story about a family of humans with a dad that is a werewolf. This shows that people will use past knowledge and experiences to make an educated guess even if they do not realize it. As they continue reading the story takes a turn and the reader find out that the family was actually a pack of wolves and the father turned into a human. The wolves in the story make an assumption and believe the father will kill all of them because he turned into a "hateful one" (Le Guin 7) and the other humans the wolves had seen tried to kill them. This caused the assumption that the father would attack the pack so the wolves attacked and killed him
It is often hard to determine truth from falsehood in today's vast, hectic society. However, it is of vital importance because of the consequences which one will be subject to if a mistake is made. As evident in Paradise Lost and Tartuffe, there are always negative effects of confusing the truth with that which is false. Much like the consequences that Eve and Orgon are subject to, one who is deceived by fraud always suffers afterwards. Thus, Paradise Lost and Tartuffe serve to warn the reader of making hasty, false decisions that defy truth.
Reason, either deductive or inductive, creates expectations in which bias is present because observations are more easily accepted as true. Deductive reasoning is moving from general truths to specific knowledge, and inductive reasoning is moving from specific details and observations to more general conclusions. Expectations can easily be formed from both types of reason and influence what is observed, as we are more easily accepting of something that we can reason to be true. However, there is false confidence in what we “should” see, as there is truly minimal certainty in reason because of the assumption that the future will be the same as the past when knowledge is always subject to re-examination and change. ...
On many occasions in your life, you will experience something that will have a great enough impact to change your opinion on a certain thing. These impactful times can vary in many different ways. However, not always will your opinion or view be changed based off of a good experience. In my case, they vary from a death in the family, to moving out of the country, and getting a different view on a new culture. For someone’s opinion to be changed, they must encounter something that presents them with legitimate facts and a new dynamic view.
Hertwig, Ralph, and Gigerenzer, Gerd. The 'Conjunction Fallacy' Revisited: How Intelligent Inferences Look Like Reasoning Errors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 275-305.