[ExI] Truth has a liberal bias [elon on twitter]

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Nov 3, 2022, at 4:05 AM, BillK via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 06:00, SR Ballard via extropy-chat
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I don’t think it’s fair to say “truth has a liberal bias” as much a conservative religious politicians lie more openly. As soon as you exclude religion, it seems that there is a conservative bias to truth.
>> 
>> SR Ballard
>> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> Truth / Reality just exists. It's not biased. It doesn't care about
> human ideologies.
> Confirmation bias is the problem with humans. When Truth or Reality
> doesn't agree with human beliefs (liberal or conservative) then it
> must be biased.
> 
> “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”
> ― Philip K. Dick

I believe we can look this in terms of Bayesianism. People who self-identify as liberal or conservative (in the US at least, though I doubt this peculiarly American) tend to cluster around a certain respective sets of priors and respective sets of biases in how they’ll approach information and even where they’ll get it from. Musk is an example of those. Notice how he quickly sympathized if not promoted with the Paul Pelosi was attacked by his lover story. (I don’t buy this story. It’s typical nonsense you see these days.)

Granted, with any devoting news story, there are bound to be new information and new interpretations that come about. I recall years ago with the Boston marathon attacks how a now as we know unrelated explosion was initially thought to be part of it. And a libertarian friend of mine, who was an Alex Jones listener, told me the media are covering up something that the Tsarnaev brothers were fall guys for a federal false flag (of course! It’s always a false flag with the Jones crowd). He just couldn’t accept that maybe ongoing reporting can make mistakes. To him it was all scripted beforehand and mistakes were slip ups in the agreed upon lie.

I also read truth is X to mean X is more likely to be closer to the truth or biased less toward ideology or something like that. In other words, an X person is far less likely to reject evidence because it doesn’t fit their ideology or partisanship or particular leader’s statements — or even less likely to reject it because they have a bad overall methodology. (There’s a confusing factor in the US now because of the alt-right crowd wanting to trigger or own liberals or progressives. In which case, it’s hard to tell if they believe something over whether they’re merely saying something to anger the other side.)

Regards,

Dan