(May 21, 2016 at 6:05 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote:Well the last psychological bias I identified in my paper was that we may have a psychological bias to oppose our psychological biases. In other words, when we become aware that we have a psychological bias toward something, we chose to accept the opposite perspective because we are trying so hard to avoid the psychological bias. An example would be knowing that we are predisposed to recognize things as the product of design. When we become aware of this bias, maybe we chose to believe that they weren't designed because it makes us feel intelligent that we were able to rise above a psychological bias. But this has nothing to do with the truth of whether or not it was designed by intelligence.(May 20, 2016 at 6:08 pm)AAA Wrote: I'm glad you are immune to psychological biases constable dorfl. I am perfectly aware. I wrote like a 10 page paper on the topic of what psychological biases influence the decisions we come to this past semester for my brain and behavior class. I read The God Delusion and Signature in the Cell and compared the two.
Nobody has shown why it is rediculous to interpret the amazing intricacy of life as the result of a mind.
AAA unlike you I am well aware of most of my biases and am actively working on minimizing their effect. If you truly wrote a ten page paper on how biases affect peoples decision making then you'd know the exact irrational basis for your continued support for creatardism, despite its complete inability to describe how life is in its current form and lack if ability to predict anything.
I feel sorry for you, in the peroids where your arrogant ignorant know-it-all posturing doesn't get annoying. You've clearly backed the wrong horse, but you've invested so much in it that you can't back outeven with clear evidence presented to you, and even though your false belief is going to stunt the rest of your life.
What is this clear evidence presented to me that you speak of?