The Alteration Of Evidence In Being Wrong By Kathryn Schulz

Improved Essays
Beliefs are constructed by our surrenders, events and teachings. But, the beliefs are based in what we want, and what the instincts feels is right. That is how we gather evidence, by our beliefs we decide what evidence to get and put on our mind, and that is how we ended making conclusions. We make conclusion every day all day, we come to conclusions before making a decision, and specially, when we try to prove a point. Every conclusion we make is not randomly done, or carefully thought, but is a natural human thing, our brain gets the evidence that more comfortably makes it or us feel good. It sound weird, right? You are probably are wondering, how can we choose what evidence to get, if to make a conclusion you see the right and the wrong. Well, in the book, “Being Wrong,” Kathryn Schulz the author, explain how we altered what evidence to get, and she does not only explain the alteration of evidence, but she …show more content…
It can help see the world and the people differently, and as I said, it can lead us to being right. But for that, first we need to learned how to prove us wrong. To prove ourselves wrong is by going against our beliefs. Schulz says “We cannot function without our beliefs, they tell us where we at, who we are, and what to do next.” Most of our lives are based in what we believe is correct, and to prove ourselves wrong it does not meant that we have to prove our beliefs wrong neither have to change them. But, we can look at the other options,other beliefs and opinions. We need to look at evidence that goes against what we believe. Question your evidence, dont ask why you are right, ask am I wrong because of blank? We cannot go against our human instinct on collecting evidence that facilitates the option of feeling right, but we can question the evidence that we collect by instinct. We can challenge ourselves to prove us wrong instead of someone else doing

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Logical reasoning puts meaning into our beliefs. With logical reasoning, we can evaluate theories, principles, or rules that can give us reasons to determine right from wrong. Diving deep into the process of looking at the reasons and finding new reasons is important in order for us to make the correct judgment of right from wrong. By having reasons, we give ourselves a strong argument against any critiques that we may encounter that would be against our beliefs such as our cultures. I believe we can’t just merely say something is right or wrong without any deep thinking about logical reasoning.…

    • 774 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However one must first identify their beliefs and question them. Questioning one owns beliefs help us learn the flaws within ourselves. As independent thinking individuals, one of our flaws is that each one of us think our beliefs are correct. This leads to multiple truths but by supporting these truths with evidence can help eliminate some of those "truths". Through experiences, we learn about ourselves and of others creating awareness which can lead to "truth".…

    • 1006 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Since people experience different kinds of situations, the outcome of the cause will create an effect, which they label as a fact. In addition they both argue that you need background research in order to participate in reasoning an idea or belief. Without any background research your argument will be vague and irrelevant. Scientists should submit rules, or norms, to follow. This will lead to cause less discrepancies and conflicts.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He does not argue that torture should be used casually, rather his argument stems from the premise that nations should not be so quick to ban torture in every single circumstance. His primary rhetorical strategy is to use hypothetical extremes to prove his point, in addition, he also appeals to emotion to evoke a sense towards Utilitarianism to justify torture in certain cases. His primary downfall in his argument was that many of his hypothetical have yet to be seen in real life, in light of this, it may delegitimize his argument in certain people’s…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We excuse or justify a threatening thought or action by persuading ourselves there is a rational explanation for it. (Schultz,2009:62-63) This defense mechanism may happen we did something wrong but we also think the reason behind it. We will see our fault as a forgivable mistake so we do not have to think about it. However, that kind of perception is only acceptable by us not for others. Others may think that our mistakes are unforgivable mistakes so they will accuse us as a consequence.…

    • 851 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It also forces connections be made to other beliefs, making people make connections that may not be relevant to the basic foundational belief. Epistemic communities have the tools to address these issues that are present in foundationalist thinking. Longino’s aspect of epistemic communities would eliminate the uncertainty of the foundational basic beliefs. By having a large group of people commenting on what the basic beliefs are would limit the bias that is possible in a foundationalist theory of justification. If one uses an absurd belief as a basic foundationalist belief, they would be questioned by others in their epistemic community.…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The evolutionary story suggests that our moral beliefs evolved organically to select for what would keep a community alive. That our morals do not approach an objective truth, but are merely adaptively fit. This lends to an argument that since we are not evolved to know the truth, our morals may be totally invalid, and so we cannot rationally believe them. This argument that we cannot trust our morals is flawed. The debunker claims that since evolution selects for fitness rather than moral truth, we cannot trust our moral beliefs to be objective, and that we must require a Good Reason to back up all our moral beliefs.…

    • 766 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Introduction To understand the idea of subjective and objective nature and how it functions in human experience, it becomes critical to understand that “greater objectivity” does us no good in understand subjectivity. I will explore this passage of Nagel and the rest of the reading to explain why subjectivity and physicalism do not correspond and how this influences Nagel’s thoughts on physicalism. Then, I will reflect on how I believe the world would become a better place if we really could access other’s subjective nature even though we are not capable of this task. Analysis In the following passage, Nagel discusses how objective experience and subjective character correlate: The idea of moving from appearance to reality seems to…

    • 1282 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Determining what is right or wrong is not going to be the same for every person. Human beings have this fascinating ability to determine their path in life, what will yours be? There is also this idea of consequentialism. Which say many people argue that humans have a conscience (which sets us apart from brute animals) and that we naturally derive what is ethically right or wrong from what our conscience tells us. Is this aspect of Moral Subjectivism something particular that humans have?…

    • 1526 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Introduction: I shall argue that the knowledge that we all acquire as humans is not only subjective, but does involve objective thought. Some have argued that it is not possible to have objective reality because what we learn passes our senses and neurochemistry, making the way that we acquire knowledge a subjective process. I will argue that objectivity is not just possible but vital to how we treat each others, how we work to understand people, and especially ourselves. I believe that subjective knowledge is our ability to sift through the objective knowledge we obtain and decide how to apply that knowledge to every day decisions within our context. Statement of ethical issue intended to solve: The ethical issue that is posed when we…

    • 781 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays