[wpietri]

Sure, but all of our cognition is biased. We're made out of meat.

I agree that using our agency-processing abilities can easily lead to wrong answers. But that's true of any of our abilities. We have a lot of hardware for visual processing, so we make graphs. Sometimes graphs mislead. But that doesn't mean we should stop using them. Instead, I think it means we should be aware of the limits of any particular cognitive mode and be energetic in cross-checking.

[chenelson]

Right, in science, bias is what we are attempting to isolate and eliminate from the experiment. Thus, regardless of what type of meat I am, causation and will exist predictably...regardless of social ontology.

I think of it in terms of bias vs bias bias, and getting caught up in my own reflection; or, it's turtles all the way down (rationalism).

[wpietri]

Sure, but what goes on in an experiment is a small part of science. Hypothesis generation is looser. As is public understanding. If I can take people who don't get evolution and talking to them in terms of what evolution "wants" pushes them over the edge, I still see that as a step forward.

[chenelson]

Well, I'll be patiently waiting for the day when a sophist moves the ball for us and not for their scheme.