

Robin Hanson's Opinion Warning Signs - tptacek
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/09/opinion-warning-signs.html

======
zeteo
It's kind of ironic to promote the cause of "truth over all else" by such
lists of arbitrary items. They always remind me of Borges' classification of
animals (<http://www.multicians.org/thvv/borges-animals.html>).

Let's just look at the last point: "Your opinion doesn’t much change after
talking with smart folks who know more." It is so full of subjective judgment.
You can hardly tell when you are yourself in such a situation (does the other
guy really know more? is he really that smart? has your opinion changed
enough?), much less accuse others who might reasonably differ on any of these
points.

~~~
spoondan
The list consists of signs that indicate when you might want to evaluate the
basis of your opinions. It is not claimed that the list items, taken
individually or collectively, are necessary or even sufficient for self-
identifying your biases. The list does not say, "If your opinion does not much
change after talking with more knowledgeable people, your opinion is
reflective of your bias." Rather, it's merely that should you find yourself
unswayed by seemingly knowledgeable people, some introspection may be in
order: do you have a reason for disagreement beyond mere conviction?

~~~
zeteo
"It is not claimed that the list items, taken individually or collectively,
are necessary or even sufficient for self-identifying your biases."

So, basically, you're saying the list is useless. I agree with that. Or maybe
we are to take its precepts as Zen koans, to be meditated upon despite their
paradoxes?

~~~
culled
I think your problem is in thinking that the list is intended to be a litmus
test for opinions. For instance you said "much less accuse others who might
reasonably differ on any of these points." which indicates that you want to be
able to point to one of these items and tell someone they're wrong.

This list is just a starting point for you to question your own opinions. Of
course it's subjective, I don't think introspection is ever intended to be
objective. As a starting point for introspection the list is fine; as
something you could ever apply to someone else you're right it's completely
worthless.

Also, what paradoxes were there? In your first post you complained that the
list was subjective (which it is) but now you're saying that it contains
paradoxes without ever saying what those paradoxes are.

~~~
zeteo
The author has stated as his main purpose the acquisition of truthful
opinions, and avoiding delusion with groupthink and such. "Objectivity" is, I
believe, the generally accepted name for such a pursuit; and introspection
with such an object is a perfectly valid activity. Hence the main paradox of
the article, which is that the author doesn't seem to have engaged in any form
of such introspection before writing down these unstructured, and pretty much
useless, musings.

------
zeteo
Any honest attempt at attaining objectivity through introspection will, I
believe, be written in the first person. See the introduction to Descartes'
"Discourse on the method" for the classical example. This list looks more like
the author being pissed off after some arguments, and gathering a collection
of what he believes are his opponents' repelling personality traits.

~~~
crystalis
"Behold! I have brought to you Socrates' man!"

------
kiba
I find that I have a too "sure" worldviews. There isn't much doubt within me,
because I don't know what I don't know specifically.

It does seem to me that the more I know, the better grip I get on my true
state of knowledge. For example, within programming, I knew that I lack many
abilities and strength. It's humbling to me.

In some area I am really weak in, I know that I lack social skills. I am
unsure what's the rule of engagement in some of the social situation that I
dealt with.

------
houseabsolute
The only one I disagree with is: "You care far more about current nearby
events than similar distant or past/future events." That just seems rational
to me. I spend more time developing opinions about things that are happening
near, spatially and temporally, because those are the things I am most likely
to be able to affect for the better.

~~~
kiba
Most current news already happen too fast for me to affect things for the
better or is outside of my influence.

By learning from past, when everything is settled down, I can prepare for
future changes. By improving myself, I can expand my sphere of influence and
make better decisions for things that I can affect within my influence.

~~~
houseabsolute
That sounds nice, but I'd appreciate some concreteness. Personally I don't
think "history" has much to teach you unless you are a general, world leader,
or someone who likes learning things for their own sake. There's not much
actionable content back there for normal people.

How exactly are you "improving yourself" and "expanding your sphere of
influence"? And have any of those had more concrete results than attending
city council meetings or telling your friends to vote for legalization?

~~~
kiba
_How exactly are you "improving yourself" and "expanding your sphere of
influence"?_

Start a Tim Ferris style business, improve fitness(to increase lifespan),
learn economic analysis, build social network and social skill and lot more.

 _And have any of those had more concrete results than attending city council
meetings or telling your friends to vote for legalization?_

My opinion is that I am unlikely to have concrete positive impact by voting in
elections. I prefer to look for way to disrupt the democratic process and the
current balance of power. That's a hard thing to do. (Some people might think
I am evil for opposing democracies though)

