June 23, 2009

on political analysis

Conor Friedersdorf continues his lonely battle against extreme political rhetoric at the temporary Atlantic Ideas blog; I summarize that post, which I endorse, as saying:

When you make an argument about hidden motivations that (a) lacks external evidence and (b) conveniently coincides with your existing biases, then it is more likely that the argument and your conclusions are attractive to you because they confirm your biases than that the argument is correct. This has less to do with the specifics of the cases quoted and more to do with a general rule about examining one's own motivations.

Posted by eatingbark at June 23, 2009 1:38 PM
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?