Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in or
create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| A '''systemic bias''' is the shared beliefs of those who participate. For instance, in a project run and used mostly by Americans, there will be a systemic bias towards [[w:American Exceptionalism]] and [[w:scientism]]. In a project run and used mostly by Internet users (like any [[large public wiki]]) there will be a systemic bias towards technological solutions as being "good". | | A '''systemic bias''' is the shared beliefs of those who participate. For instance, in a project run and used mostly by Americans, there will be a systemic bias towards [[w:American Exceptionalism]] and [[w:scientism]]. In a project run and used mostly by Internet users (like any [[large public wiki]]) there will be a systemic bias towards technological solutions as being "good". |
|
| |
|
| Edward Wenk Jr. for instance claims that the Bush Administration "lacks tolerance for healthy dissent. The most influential advisers have the same biases as the president, nurturing error, blunder and folly." [http://truthout.org/docs_03/010204D.shtml]
| | This is different from a [[systematic bias]] which arises not from ''who'' participates, but from ''how'' they work together. This is not the same thing. |
|
| |
|
| This is different from a [[systematic bias]] which arises not from ''who'' participates, but from ''how'' they work together. Such a bias would be for example voting "machines... highly vulnerable to fraud... concentration of media... the imperative to raise funds for TV ads" and the fact that "the military-industrial-congressional complex controls half the national budget and subverts priorities preferred by the electorate." Obviously these are quite closely related to the systemic bias, but, in theory, they can be differentiated. If we did not believe that, then, we could not believe that a democracy could function while still leaving such obvious power groups in place.
| | The so-called [[community point of view]] is an attempt to at least define the systemic bias of those who participate. It is almost always resisted by those who gain power via this bias alone, e.g. the [[Wikipedia Liars Club]]. If you look for [[m:community point of view]], you will not find it, as the liars are engaged in deleting it, to make sure no one realizes they ARE in fact pushing a [[point of view]] - which would require in the [[neutral point of view]] ideal that it be neutralized by engagement with some opposition, e.g. "[[trolls]]". |
| | |
| Likewise, we would not believe in "neutral points of view" or "assume good will" unless we thought we could overcome our innate biases to work together. Trying to codify the so-called [[community point of view]] is an attempt to at least define the systemic bias of those who participate. It is almost always resisted by those who gain power via this bias alone, e.g. the [[Wikipedia Liars Club]]. If you look for [[m:community point of view]], you will not find it, as the liars are engaged in deleting it, to make sure no one realizes they ARE in fact pushing a [[point of view]] - which would require in the [[neutral point of view]] ideal that it be neutralized by engagement with some opposition, e.g. "[[trolls]]".
| |
| | |
| Some believe that a [[declaration of bias]] helps reduce '''systemic bias''' by making it visible. [[Faction]]s are an example of this kind of declaration.
| |