all reasoning is motivated, calling *some* reasoning motivated is just a low-effort dismissal of that reasoning tbh
-
-
Replying to @palecur
is there a better term i should use for starting with your conclusions and working backward from them
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
-
Replying to @palecur
it's really not and saying it is is a miserable excuse for a crap behavior
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
honestly I do think it's the default human mode and not remarkably objectionable; starting from the conclusion is a good way to reach the conclusions you need to reach, and if you can't build a good chain of reasoning it's a good sign you need to pick a different conclusion.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @palecur
as far as i can tell you've conflated induction with motivated reasoning, which is... awful
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @palecur
let's say some economic tragedy has happened, and you bring a couple of economists into a room. one is a broadly trained guy with no particular ideological commitments
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @palecur
he looks at the evidence, tries to imagine ways things could have gone, and re-examines the evidence in light of different things to see how well they fit it. he is doing induction
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @palecur
the other is a committed Marxist, and he walked into the room with the conclusion that since something bad happened, it was because of the bourgeoisie exploiting the working class, so he sifts the evidence for things that can be made to say that. he is doing motivated reasoning
5 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @palecur
Imagine two strategies for avoiding errors of motivated reasoning: 1) be ex ante scrupulously neutral b/w conclusions, 2) have strict standards for what counts as evidence. Different institutions use different mixes to varying effect. Both have serious limits.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
the first one easily becomes self-defeating if you aren't careful because the need to maintain the *appearance* of neutrality biases you against valid conclusions that are outside the Overton window
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime @palecur
Yeah also you can be biased by the conceptual possibilities you see. Conversely, having a conclusion in mind ahead of time can help you find evidence (eg by narrowing the search space -- actually hard to imagine doing science without this).
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.