Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

"Neutral or Biased"

Rate this topic


William O

Recommended Posts

I just had an interesting exchange with my mother. We were discussing a work on the history of American political philosophy when she said (roughly, I'm repeating this from memory) "Of course, there would be no way to present that material objectively. They would have to bring some sort of bias into it."

I asked, "why?"

She said, "well, you would have to present it from the perspective of someone's assumptions."

I said, "if the assumptions it's based on are justified, then it's not biased."

She looked at me blankly and said, "it's either neutral or it's biased."

At this point I changed the subject.

I should add that my mother is a rational person with respect to practical things - she is a successful doctor, hard working, and very conscientious. She is also willing to change her beliefs about an issue when presented with a good argument. She is not philosophical, though, which is probably the reason she absorbed this idea from the culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, most literary or documentary bodies of work are produced for with a purpose in mind, (that is, the mind of the creator of the body of work.) If one creates a historical document with no other purpose than to inform, one is still selecting the facts, and the order in which the facts, are listed. Whether or not it is intended to present a biased body of works, someone is likely to challenge it with more facts, or contradictory and/or mitigating facts. Ultimately, if the work is factual, and it attests to a very controversial topic, (i.e. slavery, US involvement is foreign wars, or economic policies), then one can expect controversy. Someone will claim the statements are biased, merely for the omission of facts, or the order of the facts reported or emphasized. From my point of view, neutrality is the choice of the reader, provided the facts are correct. Anyone can claim to perceiving biases written into the most simple collection of facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to find history where the author does not make his opinions clear, even when he does not shove it in your face. Even those who present facts, and present reasons from various sides of a historical debate will often offer their opinion. I don't see this as bias, as such. As a reader, it is tough to judge from a single book, out of context, but we all develop a sense of judgement about whether we trust an author or not, and people who's reading history willingly are probably cross-checking against other things they read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...