Artwork

Content provided by J. Paul Neeley. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by J. Paul Neeley or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Why Bias is Rational, with Kevin Dorst

39:58
 
Share
 

Manage episode 278198614 series 2827257
Content provided by J. Paul Neeley. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by J. Paul Neeley or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
“When evidence is ambiguous––when it is hard to know how to interpret it—it can lead rational people to predictably polarize.”

Turi talks with philosopher Kevin Dorst to understand why all our cognitive ‘flaws’ - from confirmation bias and motivated reasoning, through our selective exposure to media, even the prejudice we apply to our analysis of evidence that contradicts our beliefs - should actually be thought of rational behaviour.

Ever since the 1970s, when Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky began working on the cognitive / psychological bases of our logical errors, the idea that humans are profoundly irrational has grown in popularity.

We think to satisfy emotional needs (the need to feel safe, to belong, to feel better than others) as much as epistemic ones (finding out the truth).

So much is certainly true, but - as Kevin explains - it has profound political implications.

When we come to believe that humans are irrational, it is only and always those on the other side whom we accuse of the flaw; never ourselves. And accusing our political opponents of irrationality - accusing them of intellectual corruption and cognitive breakdown - is a step towards demonising them, and a massive accelerant of the polarisation we see across our political landscapes.

Kevin Dorst tells us that story is wrong. Politics and Culture are not maths. The evidence we have for thinking one way or another is always ambiguous. The ways we think about politics and culture are, Kevin tells us, fundamentally rational approaches to Ambiguous Evidence.

Join us to hear how, and why, and what that should mean for the way we engage with those on the other side of the political spectrum.

Listen to Kevin and Turi discuss:

  • Ideological Sorting
  • Attitude Polarization
  • Affective Polarization
  • Ambiguous Evidence
  • And the pernicious effects of de-rationalising humans
“Irrationalism turns polarization into demonization.”

More on this episode


Learn all about the Parlia Podcast here.


Meet Turi Munthe: https://www.parlia.com/u/Turi


Learn more about the Parlia project here: https://www.parlia.com/about


And visit us at: https://www.parlia.com



Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

  continue reading

45 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 278198614 series 2827257
Content provided by J. Paul Neeley. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by J. Paul Neeley or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
“When evidence is ambiguous––when it is hard to know how to interpret it—it can lead rational people to predictably polarize.”

Turi talks with philosopher Kevin Dorst to understand why all our cognitive ‘flaws’ - from confirmation bias and motivated reasoning, through our selective exposure to media, even the prejudice we apply to our analysis of evidence that contradicts our beliefs - should actually be thought of rational behaviour.

Ever since the 1970s, when Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky began working on the cognitive / psychological bases of our logical errors, the idea that humans are profoundly irrational has grown in popularity.

We think to satisfy emotional needs (the need to feel safe, to belong, to feel better than others) as much as epistemic ones (finding out the truth).

So much is certainly true, but - as Kevin explains - it has profound political implications.

When we come to believe that humans are irrational, it is only and always those on the other side whom we accuse of the flaw; never ourselves. And accusing our political opponents of irrationality - accusing them of intellectual corruption and cognitive breakdown - is a step towards demonising them, and a massive accelerant of the polarisation we see across our political landscapes.

Kevin Dorst tells us that story is wrong. Politics and Culture are not maths. The evidence we have for thinking one way or another is always ambiguous. The ways we think about politics and culture are, Kevin tells us, fundamentally rational approaches to Ambiguous Evidence.

Join us to hear how, and why, and what that should mean for the way we engage with those on the other side of the political spectrum.

Listen to Kevin and Turi discuss:

  • Ideological Sorting
  • Attitude Polarization
  • Affective Polarization
  • Ambiguous Evidence
  • And the pernicious effects of de-rationalising humans
“Irrationalism turns polarization into demonization.”

More on this episode


Learn all about the Parlia Podcast here.


Meet Turi Munthe: https://www.parlia.com/u/Turi


Learn more about the Parlia project here: https://www.parlia.com/about


And visit us at: https://www.parlia.com



Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

  continue reading

45 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide