The Instigator
SuperRobotWars
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
larztheloser
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Bias Is Human Nature

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/7/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,521 times Debate No: 13094
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

SuperRobotWars

Pro

I believe that bias is a part of human nature, and that humans naturally have biased opinions on just about everything.
This is my first debate.
larztheloser

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this debate and welcome him to this site! This debate is all about what qualifies as bias. After all, humans are capable of making both biased and objective judgments. My core contention is that biased judgments originate from other people and not from the individual themselves, while my opponent is arguing that humans always make biased judgments without basis.

This is simply untrue. It's not supported by any psychological study. People always generate biases based upon their experiences, as opposed to generating biases randomly. That would be akin to denying the fact that Labor Party supporters are generally left-wing, because if the biases were randomly independently generated, one might expect people who are biased toward the Labor Party to have a 50% chance of also being left wing.

So how are biases generated? Well, my mother grew up in Hamburg, with German food. This caused her to acqire a taste for German food. Therefore she has a bias towards it ie when given the choice between German and Spanish food, she will choose the German. This bias influences all the people she eats with in a number of ways. It could make them want to try it. It could disgust them. They might be indifferent. The bias was not spontaneously generated in her or her friend's minds. She created the bias.

Some things, however, are not biases in this sense and are thus not what this debate is about. These are survival or animal instincts. This is because these are not a bias, but a basis for producing bias. Let me give a hypothetical example. My mother gets food poisoning. This causes the instincts to produce a anti-German-food / anti-that-particular-restaurant / whatever bias. Without that event the instincts would remain stagnant.

Bias does not come naturally. Bias comes as a result of experience. I await my opponent's case.
Debate Round No. 1
SuperRobotWars

Pro

But humans are taught by those who take care of them and receive the biases of those that take care of them. And as the specie that we are (homo sapiens sapiens) we naturally raise our young and teach them. And if you decide to use the argument that there are those without parents my rebuttal is that we still require someone (or something) to take care of us in order to survive, think about it a baby cant survive without food and a baby cant hunt and doesn't have the instincts (or the body) to fend for itself.
larztheloser

Con

When we receive the biases of those who take care of us, that's not an example of a randomly generated bias. That bias was not innate in that child - that child had to "learn" the bias. This is contrary to pro's standpoint. Pro thinks that humans NATURALLY have biased opinions about everything. Not true. Humans gain their biases ARTIFICIALLY, ie through outside means such as, but not limited to, upbringing by parents or surrogate parents. That's where biases come from.

I still await pro's argument, because he hasn't made a proper one yet. The onus is on the one bringing the absurd claim to prove it. The absurd claim here is Pro's case. Even if he does make a proper argument in the last round however, I think it will be too little, too late. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
SuperRobotWars

Pro

But it is still natural since children naturally "learn" bias from those who take care of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
larztheloser

Con

My opponent here has done two things. First, he's tried to win at least your "who had better sources" vote. Second, he's tried to confuse you about what natural means. I have three responses.

1) Children don't always react in the same way to their parents. This is known as the butterfly effect (http://en.wikipedia.org...). If the bias to learn from one's parents were natural one might expect these biases to be homogeneous in children.

2) That's not an argument for natural bias. Natural bias comes as the result of a person's nature. It is well established that a person's nature is not totally determined by their nurture (http://en.wikipedia.org...). My argument is that the part of a person's nature that determines bias is 100% artificial, and that natural bias therefore does not exist. I'm really stealing this argument from John Locke's "Tabula Rusa" idea (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

3) You still have to prove the second part of your contention (that humans therefore naturally have biased opinions about EVERYTHING). You have not done so.

Please vote Con now.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
larztheloser
Thanks!
Posted by darkkermit 6 years ago
darkkermit
Wow larztheloser argued an impossible argument and won, nice job.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Actually... you're right. Your level of "analysis" was higher. I just looked at end impacts. Changing my vote now :P
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
That's not the thing.. You both made "convincing arguments". It's like trying to prove that liberalism or conservatism is better. Both make outstanding points and you can't absolutely choose one over the other.
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
larztheloser
Hey, thanks! Just out of interest, could you tell me how I could have won your "who made the best arguments" vote? I would have thought my marginal level of analysis to be slightly more than his?
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
I voted in ALL honesty. Pro started sentences and paragraphs with "but" which is FAIL :)
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
Well then, you think of a way to win this debate straight.
Posted by Atheism 6 years ago
Atheism
Aw, it's his first debate.
Let him be, douchbaggery.
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
Meh, I'm going to have to think of some douche bag way of winning this.
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
'Raise a human without access to society, ask them to write some stuff, they'll probably write it objectively'

Not if it's human NATURE.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by sllewuy 6 years ago
sllewuy
SuperRobotWarslarztheloserTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
SuperRobotWarslarztheloserTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Brendan21 6 years ago
Brendan21
SuperRobotWarslarztheloserTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
SuperRobotWarslarztheloserTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04