Occlumency

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 191698









> Pippin:
> Oh my. Please understand that  the term "cognitive bias" is not derogatory. It is a term from psychology that  refers to a systematic human tendency to make decisions based on cognitive factors rather than evidence. This is not my field, and I may be getting things horribly wrong, but I will try to explain. <SNIP>

Alla:

I will definitely read up on it, but yeah, if I understand it correctly, this term seems to imply that the arguments I made are based on what my subconscious tells me, rather than on factual evidence that I read in the books and interpret differently from you, correct? And I take exception to that in the situation of internet discussion. You are not in my head Pippin, you cant read my mind (rather ironic that we are debating Legilimency right now of course).  How could you know what subconscious bias do I have and what I do not have? It seems to me that stating that I or anybody else has a cognitive bias (it is a synonym to subconscious bias, am I understanding it correctly?) against accepting that Snape is not evil trying to tell me that if I do not see facts your way, I am biased based on some unknown reasons/additional factors, as opposed to I have read all the facts and made a different conclusion which is just as valid as yours because I interpreted those facts differently. Because to me whether Snape is an evil person or not is not a canon fact, it is mostly an interpretation of facts. Now  if after reading book seven I were still to claim that Snape worked for Voldemort and refuse to see the clear *fact* written on the page that he worked for Dumbledore to bring Voldemort's demise, then sure, I take your point, you would be free to speculate that there is something in my subconscious that refuses to let me see the *facts* written on page. As it stands right now? No way. I see Snape as evil because of what he did to Harry, and that's subject to interpretation. I do not make up additional stuff and say because I see what he did to Harry as evil, he just must be evil in many other unknown ways, I just interpret certain events differently from you. I am annoyed because you just *cant* know why I interpret facts the way I do. 

Let me twist it this way. What if in response to one of your defense of Dumbledore's arguments, instead of trying to poke holes in the defense itself and not being able to find one, I were to say that you have a cognitive bias against accepting after book seven that Dumbledore's manipulations hurt Harry and made his life hell? What if I were to say that you would not see the facts about Dumbledore if they danced in front of you wearing red because your subconscious stops you? Wouldn't you want to tell me to go jump in the lake to cool myself down and stop being so rude and please argue with your arguments instead of making up stuff about what is in your head?  Because if I were to say that, *I* would want to say it to me! (NOTE: I am not saying that! I will never agree with your defense of Dumbledore, but I certainly think it is a valid argument.)

 
> Alla:
> . I hate Snape and Dumbledore because of how *I* see canon facts, thats all there is to it, really.
> 
> Pippin:
> Of course. But if you are like most people, how  you see  facts may be subject to cognitive factors outside your awareness and beyond your control and these *may* lead you, or me, or any person, to unconsciously favor some conclusions despite the evidence. 
> 
> If you want to know more about this, I recommend the book "Thinking Fast And Slow" by  
> Daniel Kahneman

Alla:

It may, for sure, but since we are in the internet discussion, it seems to me that this goes above and beyond the stuff we are arguing about. If you can read my mind that would be different story, otherwise you are just assuming stuff and I always think it is better not to assume. Otherwise you are putting me in the position having to defend my subconscious instead of defending what I wrote on page.

I will look up the book though, thanks.