It is reasonable to expect that with a common set of facts, two experts within a discipline with a high level of expertise will make similar conclusions. However, as is evident in society and the areas of knowledge, experts will reach a wide variety of varying opinions that result in disagreements.
Within the area of history, there are many discrepancies that arise between the opinions of experts due to bias. How does bias affect knowledge within history? For example, while researching the Bay of Pigs Invasion in my history class, I found that experts varied in opinion on the blame that should be placed on President Kennedy for the failure of the invasion. As I looked at the variety of sources that have been created since the invasion failed, …show more content…
For example, within politics, much of the partisan divide found in democratic systems globally arise from a lack of desire to acquire the necessary information on the part of the voter, and also the usage of politically biased sources as a primary news source. How is new knowledge affected by negligent experts? The experts of democratic elections are those who participate in the democratic process themselves to make an informed decision about who to vote for. In an ideal system, all experts will utilize a broad spectrum of resources to make an informed decision about who to support in the election itself. For instance, in a conversation with a voter, I found that the voter used politically biased sources and sources that lack meaningful content as their sources of facts in order make their judgment on who to vote for. The voter believed that Hillary Clinton, the U.S. presidential candidate, wanted to outlaw abortions, stating that she had read this information online in a news article. However, to my personal knowledge, Hillary Clinton is against outlawing abortions. One of these ideas must have arisen from a uncredible news source that sought to mislead the public on an unambiguous policy of the candidate. The experts did not choose to seek other sources in order to verify the facts presented, solely choosing to …show more content…
Status as an expert will create an illusion of credibility within the mind of the less knowledgeable. However, it is clear that the experts often will choose to ignore certain sources of information that they believe oppose their views. For example, the labeling of news sources as being liberal or conservative provide a way for experts to avoid sources that might contrast with their personal views. The deliberate avoidance of opposing views is found throughout the human sciences, and in other areas of knowledge as well. Experts in fields will try to avoid the facts that are available to them and misinform others to reinforce their intuition at the cost of polluting common knowledge. Expertise does not prevent an expert from falling prey to common human flaws such as ignorance and the desire to reinforce one’s beliefs, and this is common to other areas of knowledge as well, as shown with bias in
Within the area of history, there are many discrepancies that arise between the opinions of experts due to bias. How does bias affect knowledge within history? For example, while researching the Bay of Pigs Invasion in my history class, I found that experts varied in opinion on the blame that should be placed on President Kennedy for the failure of the invasion. As I looked at the variety of sources that have been created since the invasion failed, …show more content…
For example, within politics, much of the partisan divide found in democratic systems globally arise from a lack of desire to acquire the necessary information on the part of the voter, and also the usage of politically biased sources as a primary news source. How is new knowledge affected by negligent experts? The experts of democratic elections are those who participate in the democratic process themselves to make an informed decision about who to vote for. In an ideal system, all experts will utilize a broad spectrum of resources to make an informed decision about who to support in the election itself. For instance, in a conversation with a voter, I found that the voter used politically biased sources and sources that lack meaningful content as their sources of facts in order make their judgment on who to vote for. The voter believed that Hillary Clinton, the U.S. presidential candidate, wanted to outlaw abortions, stating that she had read this information online in a news article. However, to my personal knowledge, Hillary Clinton is against outlawing abortions. One of these ideas must have arisen from a uncredible news source that sought to mislead the public on an unambiguous policy of the candidate. The experts did not choose to seek other sources in order to verify the facts presented, solely choosing to …show more content…
Status as an expert will create an illusion of credibility within the mind of the less knowledgeable. However, it is clear that the experts often will choose to ignore certain sources of information that they believe oppose their views. For example, the labeling of news sources as being liberal or conservative provide a way for experts to avoid sources that might contrast with their personal views. The deliberate avoidance of opposing views is found throughout the human sciences, and in other areas of knowledge as well. Experts in fields will try to avoid the facts that are available to them and misinform others to reinforce their intuition at the cost of polluting common knowledge. Expertise does not prevent an expert from falling prey to common human flaws such as ignorance and the desire to reinforce one’s beliefs, and this is common to other areas of knowledge as well, as shown with bias in