Truth is just not a big commodity these days. In a world overflowing with opinions, we tend to pick ones we like and ignore everything else. Then when we're forced to interact with others and get a good dose of opposition, seemingly normal people suddenly get violent.
The Third Rail. And the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth...
This phenomena can be seen in any chat involving Donald Trump, Flat Earth, vaccines, racial issues or global warming, for starters. Oh, the craziness!
The violence people feel toward each other when having their biases challenged is...well, I'd say 'unreal', but even that word has lost it's meaning these days.
This is where fake news comes from. And any of us can be guilty of spreading fake news if we just try to uphold what we like and ignore what we don't.
If there's anything I've learned since beginning to blog, it's that when I want to voice an opinion, I have to confirm it by going to the enemy camp. If I'm not a direct eyewitness myself, I need witnesses who can be respected. It's hard to overcome my own confirmation bias, but I keep telling myself that if something I believe is actually true, it can stand up to testing.
What Is Confirmation Bias?
Confirmation bias is one of the biggest pitfalls to good blogging.
Oh, sorry: my opinion slipped out there. THIS is an actual definition from the Google dictionary:
con·fir·ma·tion bi·as
noun
The tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.
Real Truth Is Hard To Hide
Citing honest sources is one of the biggest favors a good blogger can do for their audience. When you cite sources unfavorable to you but which support your point, it's a sign that you actually have a real fact in your hands.
If something is true, you're going to be able to find and cite real evidence of it from multiple places. And if it's overwhelmingly true, you're going to find evidence even in places that don't want to admit it.
Please. Don't cite an echo chamber.
A Good Source Is Not Just Someone Who Makes You Feel Good
A blog is pretty tempting to turn into a private journal, a place to dash out a ream of personal opinions and argue with anyone who disagrees with them. Oh sure, there are plenty of links to throw in to make it look like there's a mountain of backup, but that's where a lot of blogs start to break down.
If something is worth linking to in support of your point, it can't just be someone else ranting their opinion in the same vein. There has to be something solid, something truthful, not just a morass of more opinions you happen to like. Give some facts, give the source for the facts and be honest with yourself about the biases of the sources.
As Shakespeare famously said,
"This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man."
When I see someone able to be truthful about themselves and their sources, I sit up and take notice.
The Value Of A Good Blog
When I'm researching, blogs are often valuable portals. I'm looking for breadcrumbs leading back to solid evidence it might otherwise take me a long time to find. I want to find new things to search for, new places to go looking, new evidence I hadn't known about. Keywords and phrases I hadn't heard before. Clarification on contradictory information.
A blog post isn't like a peer-reviewed journal: it's often like the Cliff Notes version of the real deal. But if the blog post accurately reported the peer-reviewed journal in context and linked to it, now you might have a solid witness. (Some "peer-reviewed" things turn out to be garbage - peers can be echo chambers too. Be wary!)
To write truthfully is a golden skill. We have a gigantic mountain of confusing information on pretty much any topic you could think up. Sorting through it to form an informed position is tough. When you're writing for a permanent place like a blockchain, there is particular need for good journalism: and good journalism isn't taught in school. (If you think it is, we should have a conversation sometime...)
We're All Reporters Sometime
Be truthful out there, guys. Cite your sources and cite GOOD sources. Test your opinions to see if they're true. And don't dismiss someone else because you think they might be crazy and their information is uncomfortable. Actually read their links, consider their evidence and remember we have important things to say to each other.
Don't let your confirmation bias kill the opportunity!
Source Confirmation Bias Cartoon by Kris Straub
Source Railway Picture on Pixabay
Source Man in Echo Chamber on Computer by Christopher Vorlet
Source Information Overload
If opposition serves no further growth, then it deserves my either nod-nod, or a review ... and moving on. I mean, I don't agree with so many things, but to persist into proving my point is in no way something I want to waste my life on(people call it time, but I call it a life).
The interpretation of facts are different, that makes a performance a bit hard but as you said, confirmation bias can kill the opportunity, and not only that.
You have a good point on the nod-nod and move on - there are so many things I find I disagree with, but why argue with someone over it? That might be one reason people are having such a hard time right now, because social media and other Internet comment options makes it so they're able to engage with a whole lot of people and they get a certain satisfaction out of being RIGHT, so much of life ends up being wasted picking little arguments and fights to prove how right they are. Ack.
I used to be a newspaper reporter and staff writer years ago.
I was NEVER allowed to have an article go to press without both sides of the story or a clause stating the other person had been contacted but had not replied or commented at press time. Guaranteed when the article came out the other person was on the phone returning my messages for quotes.
The stigma of getting all sides of the story has stuck with me for decades.
I may not agree with someone's viewpoints or opinions but they still have the right to speak their mind.
Facts are facts... pundits are propaganda usually.
I think what's been lost in much of our current dialogue is that even if you disagree, you have to acknowledge the disagreement for what it is rather than acting as if your side is the only side there is and anyone who thinks differently is an idiot to be turned into a strawman and blown to bits. Forget knocking it down, we obliterate our strawmen these days.
There is such an urge to just reinvent a person who disagrees with us on some point into a complete monster embodying everything we hate...
I seek out people I disagree with on purpose. In the gymnasium (our version of high school) I spent so much time talking theology with a guy who was the complete opposite of me in our worldview.
I try to take all things back to the one source of truth we do have, the Word of God.
Seeking out people and opinion that differ from my own has made me grow over the years. That guy in the gymnasium? We still wildly agree, but that's because I've switched my beliefs to be on the other side of him while he is still in the same place. Funny how that worked out, huh?
It's so difficult to see our own bias but when we are confronted with the opinion of others, even if we do not argue with them, which there isn't a need for most of the time. We should still argue with them in our head. Try both sides of the case and hold it to the Word if possible.
But hey, that's just my bias speaking ;)
I agree that there are many times to argue in my head but not in fact - I don't tend to seek out people I disagree with often because the mental energy it takes to fairly discuss with someone of a completely opposing viewpoint is so massive. I also find that there are very few people really willing to have a rational discussion and it's just discouraging when a conversation instantly devolves into mockery and name-calling.
That is funny how your situation with your debate partner worked out! My husband has a friend in a similar way, where he used to be all the way to one side and now has gone to the other side of him.
Having a bias is unavoidable: you have experiences and have learned from them and they form your bias. The question is...how willing are you to acknowledge your biases and submit them to the truth for analysis?
If you can know your bias and test it's worth, then you are a very truthful person and your arguments have value. ;-)
I don't always no them for sure!
This is going to sound very judgemental but I don't know another way of putting it: Most Danes don't go into mockery and name-calling instantly. Most are able to have decent conversations with people we disagree with. It's something we value very highly and in school we are encouraged to have our own opinions and make valid arguments for them. It's perfectly fine (in most cases) to present a differing view even in an exam situation, as long as you can present good arguments for your view.
You can go ahead and be judgmental: it is definitely a current failing in the United States. Exercising good judgment should be honored, not castigated; sadly, "being judgmental" is definitely one of the current un-politically-correct abilities in our society.
My near family is mostly English, German and Irish. In this culture, we tend to be less the hot-heads and more the ones who will avoid confrontation. We are having to learn how to politely stand firm because otherwise we end up getting run over by people who like to yell and scream and call names rather than have a reasonable argument.
I'm shocked at how difficult it is to find people to have the kind of arguments I'm used to being able to have, where you can present different views without descending into stereotyping, mocking and ignoring the person you're conversing with.
It is sad. I love a good debate, it's often how I grow and figure out what I really believe and why.
I like how clear you are putting this down. Like every pitfall in the book is here.
We all tend to think that almost everything that is written is truth and therefore can be cited.
Greetings from a private journal :D
Thank you!
Hey, private journals are fine: I certainly have my own!
I'm more thinking of people who want to be sort of research bloggers or reporters. An opinion or philosophy is great if it's simply a discussion of a thought the blogger had, but so often people are trying to be reporters and it gets tiring to have snarkiness be the mode of conversation:
I'm not even exaggerating - simply questions are often met with statements like "Why don't you just do some research with Google and be less ignorant?"