Even when most peoples beliefs are junk you won’t know before you considered the belief in detail.
You probably just increase the effect of confirmation bias when you reject beliefs without examining them.
Thinking outside your own set of beliefs is also good training.
You probably just increase the effect of confirmation bias when you reject beliefs without examining them.
I understood the strengthened confirmation bias as being in the person with ‘junk’ beliefs and ‘reject’ to mean public rejection. Wedrifid apparently interpreted the person in danger of having confirmation bias strengthened as being ‘you’, and to ‘reject’ meaning simply to not accept. Which did you intend?
Wedrifid apparently interpreted the person in danger of having confirmation bias strengthened as being ‘you’, and to ‘reject’ meaning simply to not accept. Which did you intend?
I make the first of those interpretations. With respect to ‘reject’ I would maintain my comment with either definition. (Although with acknowledgement that pubic rejections can be mere politics and barely relevant to beliefs and explorations thereof.)
Even when most peoples beliefs are junk you won’t know before you considered the belief in detail. You probably just increase the effect of confirmation bias when you reject beliefs without examining them.
Of course, there is an opportunity cost associated with exploring any given belief. The prior probability of the belief and the potential benefits and costs associated with the topic determine whether or not it is worth investigating further. It is not confirmation bias to ignore ideas that have a low expected value of investigation. You simply leave your level of confidence unchanged.
Thinking outside your own set of beliefs is also good training.
That is one factor consider. Another is “thinking outside your own set of beliefs can be fun”.
Even when most peoples beliefs are junk you won’t know before you considered the belief in detail. You probably just increase the effect of confirmation bias when you reject beliefs without examining them.
Thinking outside your own set of beliefs is also good training.
I understood the strengthened confirmation bias as being in the person with ‘junk’ beliefs and ‘reject’ to mean public rejection. Wedrifid apparently interpreted the person in danger of having confirmation bias strengthened as being ‘you’, and to ‘reject’ meaning simply to not accept. Which did you intend?
I make the first of those interpretations. With respect to ‘reject’ I would maintain my comment with either definition. (Although with acknowledgement that pubic rejections can be mere politics and barely relevant to beliefs and explorations thereof.)
Of course, there is an opportunity cost associated with exploring any given belief. The prior probability of the belief and the potential benefits and costs associated with the topic determine whether or not it is worth investigating further. It is not confirmation bias to ignore ideas that have a low expected value of investigation. You simply leave your level of confidence unchanged.
That is one factor consider. Another is “thinking outside your own set of beliefs can be fun”.