Being Biased Towards Bias
Argumentation is one of the most essential forms of communication, because it helps answer society’s problems. Argumentation defined by Rybacki is “a form of instrumental communication, relying on reasoning and proof to influence belief or behavior through the use of spoken or written messages” (Rybacki 3). Notably being biased in an argument has a negative connotation amongst people and can also be used as a tool to attack an opponent in an argument (Walton 28). Alternatively, others believe being biased is having a passion to a particular stand point. There are numerous types of bias and after processing them in an argument it is logically to believe that an argument can never be bias free. That is to say that …show more content…
In fact, scientist try to come up with the answer, because they are “the experts”, but how often do they water down the facts to compose them further manageable for the public or come up with the outcome they want to see (Walton 30). The science causes for the audience to be extra positive biased toward the “professionals” decision. Hence, if scientists were respected to have the best knowledge of their field, wouldn’t Arguer B. have just as much knowledge in the field they are passionate about? Conforming to the ad verecundiam fallacy, even though there is emotion involved, both are still experts in what they do (40). A person’s ethos is always taken into effect in every form of argument whether it is positive or negative (36). Thus, every argument comes down to the effect amounts of techniques used to shift the audience’s bias in their favor or against their …show more content…
That being the case, all forms of bias are displayed here, because this is our biggest stage for argumentation. Starting off, persuasion is present on both teams, in the fact that they are both moving to present whatever message to the jury that they can to win their case. The different sides try to place reasoning and evidence before the evidence so they can see the point of each side (Rybacki 4). Ad hominem is genuine in a case and is a large generator of bias in a courtroom. The prosecutor is generally trying to build the accused’s character as a second-rate person and a menace to society, while the defense tries to restore character in the accused. In the case of Casey Anthony, the prosecutor and over half of America, deemed Casey Anthony as a neglectful mother and a murderer way before the case even went to trial. With the amount of stories about Casey Anthony circulating through social media and television, it is a surprise that they would find a jury that didn’t already have a bias towards Anthony. The biggest contributor to bias on the forensic science side is scientific argumentation. Scientist or experts in forensic science are constantly making bias decisions when doing work in their field. The experts claim that fingerprinting works all the time, even when the first time it failed; that one failure was pushed
Argumentation is one of the most essential forms of communication, because it helps answer society’s problems. Argumentation defined by Rybacki is “a form of instrumental communication, relying on reasoning and proof to influence belief or behavior through the use of spoken or written messages” (Rybacki 3). Notably being biased in an argument has a negative connotation amongst people and can also be used as a tool to attack an opponent in an argument (Walton 28). Alternatively, others believe being biased is having a passion to a particular stand point. There are numerous types of bias and after processing them in an argument it is logically to believe that an argument can never be bias free. That is to say that …show more content…
In fact, scientist try to come up with the answer, because they are “the experts”, but how often do they water down the facts to compose them further manageable for the public or come up with the outcome they want to see (Walton 30). The science causes for the audience to be extra positive biased toward the “professionals” decision. Hence, if scientists were respected to have the best knowledge of their field, wouldn’t Arguer B. have just as much knowledge in the field they are passionate about? Conforming to the ad verecundiam fallacy, even though there is emotion involved, both are still experts in what they do (40). A person’s ethos is always taken into effect in every form of argument whether it is positive or negative (36). Thus, every argument comes down to the effect amounts of techniques used to shift the audience’s bias in their favor or against their …show more content…
That being the case, all forms of bias are displayed here, because this is our biggest stage for argumentation. Starting off, persuasion is present on both teams, in the fact that they are both moving to present whatever message to the jury that they can to win their case. The different sides try to place reasoning and evidence before the evidence so they can see the point of each side (Rybacki 4). Ad hominem is genuine in a case and is a large generator of bias in a courtroom. The prosecutor is generally trying to build the accused’s character as a second-rate person and a menace to society, while the defense tries to restore character in the accused. In the case of Casey Anthony, the prosecutor and over half of America, deemed Casey Anthony as a neglectful mother and a murderer way before the case even went to trial. With the amount of stories about Casey Anthony circulating through social media and television, it is a surprise that they would find a jury that didn’t already have a bias towards Anthony. The biggest contributor to bias on the forensic science side is scientific argumentation. Scientist or experts in forensic science are constantly making bias decisions when doing work in their field. The experts claim that fingerprinting works all the time, even when the first time it failed; that one failure was pushed