With regards to whether an issue exists or not.. I mean if readers can perceive it, then it exists.
How certain are you of this?
If told that a particular tune is present, a significant fraction of people will report that they can hear the tune when presented with recordings of white noise.
If told that a pattern is present, a significant fraction of people will find a pattern in a random distribution of points. (Constellations, for example.)
Indeed. When we are talking about facts about reality, then these kind of things become a problem. When we are talking about people’s critical response to the text, then if someone has that response to a text, then its there for them at least. If multiple people do, then we can argue that
a-there’s something about the text which causes this reaction in a subgroup of people
b-this subgroup of people would have this reaction to every single text.
I assign b a lower probability because this is a reaction borne of particular chapters rather than the entire novel.
This could be an interesting way to measure mindkilling. Get people from different groups, let them hear white noise or see random points and ask them to report how often they hear/see messages offensive to their groups. (For example how often a fundamentalist religious person would hear/see indecent or satanic messages.)
Are we talking about whether or not a measurable phenomenon exists, though? I thought we were talking about a completely subjective kind of thing. You can control for whether or not people are judging levels of sound or patterns or physical comfort inaccurately due to some bias, but is there even such a thing as judging their own emotional reactions inaccurately due to some bias?
I don’t think that it’s judging their own emotional reactions inaccurately due to some bias so much as it is perceiving information in a matter that it results in an unwarranted emotional reaction due to some bias.
A persecution complex is the standard example, I believe. If one is predisposed to believe that they are being attacked, then one sees it everywhere—sometimes they are noticing something real that is subtle enough that others don’t pick it up, and sometimes they are (essentially) selectively interpreting the information to back up their preconceived notions.
I get something like that on an airplane or bus every once in a while. I usually spend about a minute trying to exert some control over the process, but I’ve yet to internally locate the on/off switch for that version of it. (it’s not a normal ear-wig, which can be defused by forcibly thinking of a different arbitrary song; it’s confined to what may or may not be the harmonics of the vehicle I’m on.)
How certain are you of this?
If told that a particular tune is present, a significant fraction of people will report that they can hear the tune when presented with recordings of white noise.
If told that a pattern is present, a significant fraction of people will find a pattern in a random distribution of points. (Constellations, for example.)
Indeed. When we are talking about facts about reality, then these kind of things become a problem. When we are talking about people’s critical response to the text, then if someone has that response to a text, then its there for them at least. If multiple people do, then we can argue that
a-there’s something about the text which causes this reaction in a subgroup of people b-this subgroup of people would have this reaction to every single text.
I assign b a lower probability because this is a reaction borne of particular chapters rather than the entire novel.
This could be an interesting way to measure mindkilling. Get people from different groups, let them hear white noise or see random points and ask them to report how often they hear/see messages offensive to their groups. (For example how often a fundamentalist religious person would hear/see indecent or satanic messages.)
Are we talking about whether or not a measurable phenomenon exists, though? I thought we were talking about a completely subjective kind of thing. You can control for whether or not people are judging levels of sound or patterns or physical comfort inaccurately due to some bias, but is there even such a thing as judging their own emotional reactions inaccurately due to some bias?
I don’t think that it’s judging their own emotional reactions inaccurately due to some bias so much as it is perceiving information in a matter that it results in an unwarranted emotional reaction due to some bias.
A persecution complex is the standard example, I believe. If one is predisposed to believe that they are being attacked, then one sees it everywhere—sometimes they are noticing something real that is subtle enough that others don’t pick it up, and sometimes they are (essentially) selectively interpreting the information to back up their preconceived notions.
I get something like that on an airplane or bus every once in a while. I usually spend about a minute trying to exert some control over the process, but I’ve yet to internally locate the on/off switch for that version of it. (it’s not a normal ear-wig, which can be defused by forcibly thinking of a different arbitrary song; it’s confined to what may or may not be the harmonics of the vehicle I’m on.)