I think that “tribal bias” is the norm, not the exception, and accusing someone of having their reasoning messed with, to some extent, by tribal biases is a little like accusing them of having shit that stinks. I’d much rather hold off and only criticize people when they deal with visible bias poorly, and It’s legitimately hard enough to see your own tribal biases and how they affect your thinking that I’m a little hesitant to accuse someone of being blatantly dishonest because they don’t see and correct for what looks like a bias to me. Especially since sometimes what looks like a bias is actually just noticing that they’re using a valid heuristic that you don’t understand because you’re not part of their tribe.
That said, it’s clear that satt wasn’t offering Lumifer the amount of charity that I think Lumifer deserves, and was more focused on finding holes in Lumifer’s relatively (albeit intentionally and not overly, in my opinion) imprecise arguments than on finding the merits of Lumifer’s arguments, which I’d argue is a much better way of going about things, in general.
I think that “tribal bias” is the norm, not the exception, and accusing someone of having their reasoning messed with, to some extent, by tribal biases is a little like accusing them of having shit that stinks. I’d much rather hold off and only criticize people when they deal with visible bias poorly, and It’s legitimately hard enough to see your own tribal biases and how they affect your thinking that I’m a little hesitant to accuse someone of being blatantly dishonest because they don’t see and correct for what looks like a bias to me. Especially since sometimes what looks like a bias is actually just noticing that they’re using a valid heuristic that you don’t understand because you’re not part of their tribe.
That said, it’s clear that satt wasn’t offering Lumifer the amount of charity that I think Lumifer deserves, and was more focused on finding holes in Lumifer’s relatively (albeit intentionally and not overly, in my opinion) imprecise arguments than on finding the merits of Lumifer’s arguments, which I’d argue is a much better way of going about things, in general.