Reading up on sources that actively oppose your bias might be actively harmful if misinformation is widespread, though. If we define facts as indisputable evidence conveyed via trustworthy sources, then sure, go find more such facts that oppose your views. But the scary part is how much literal “fake news,” and false flag claims there are. By your assertion, if we are naturally biased about Ukraine, we should equally hunt down facts from “the other side,” but there are very few objectively trustworthy sources right now that are willing to go on the record. And nation-states waging active Information warfare campaigns. It’s obvious to any outsider that Ukraine has a bias, is biased as a source. But… they do allow reporters in, so I think there can be acknowledgement of bias without actively having to hunt down opposing opinions. Just be aware that what you’re seeing is one-sided and you’ll go farther in resetting your biases, is my thinking on this. Of course, being typed in haste, it’s probably wildly naive as the fine article describes. Perhaps talking it out with those of different biases holds part of the answer. (Or perhaps I naively still believe in an objective truth of events that cannot be easily proven to exist in digital mediums outside of our trust in math for cryptography?)
> (Or perhaps I naively still believe in an objective truth of events that cannot be easily proven to exist in digital mediums outside of our trust in math for cryptography?)
This, 100% this. I do this all the time as well and try to boil down super complex social situations into a binary right or wrong outcome. Is it even possible to comprehensively analyze any social situation? I really don't think it is, and I think the best we can do is analyze each unique situation and come to the best conclusion possible for that specific situation.
But that's just part of living in the world we live in. In the same way we can't physically compute the weather in advance, because doing so would require an accurate simulation of our universe which has way too much data to process with our current hardware, we shouldn't expect to be able to accurately "compute" whether a worldview is right or wrong.
The real world is fuzzy, and it rarely fits into our ideal scenarios. I think the best we can do is to just give life our best shot and give people with opposing ideals the benefit of the doubt and maybe even try to learn from people who think differently than us :)
