Biased or Biased?

A conversation with myself. He might be biased.

Rationalists talk a lot about bias. Availability bias. Confirmation bias. Hindsight bias. Ingroup bias. Bias bias.

It’s sort of part of the water now.

Deutschians don’t like talking about bias. They freely concede that humans are mistaken. That’s what it means to be human. But is human nature systematically biased? Nope. That invokes barriers, and invoking barriers is one thing a Deutschian don’t do. Well, that and violating the laws of physics.

I’m sort of a Deutschian but I’m sort of a rationalist and I find myself sitting here thinking about biases. 

Am I biased? How much? What particular biases afflict me?

When I say that I’m sitting here thinking about biases I really mean I’m getting stuck in neurotic recursive loops.

There are two biases I find myself coming back to. They form an interesting dynamic as they pull in opposite directions. The first is social desirability bias. The second is an inclination to contrarianism. I assume both are at play but it’s hard to determine which one dominates. 

Part of you wants to fit in. Part of you wants to stand out. Preferably, you want to stand out in an acceptable fitting in sort of way.

Let’s look at an example: Gender and IQ. Sound fun? It seems plausible that men are smarter than women. On average, on average, of course. And only slightly. But still. Not the sort of thing you bring up at the in-laws. We’re all familiar with the greater variance hypothesis, but it’s not just that: It’s plausible that the means are different.

I don’t bring this up to make a culture war sparring point. But rather to reflect on my mind state while learning (or refusing to learn) about it.

Am I just a contrarian looking for this sort of thing?

Contrarianism itself probably needs to be unpacked. It gets used a few ways. Firstly, as a descriptor for someone who has uncommon views. Secondly, it gets used for someone who likes having uncommon views. It maybe even has a third meaning: Someone who likes to have offensive views. An edgelord. Shock jock. You know the type.

I have uncommon views so I pass the first definition. Maybe not that uncommon compared to you guys. But to normal people who don’t read about IQ, let alone IQ gaps.

I probably meet the second definition too. I like saying recycling is overrated to NPR listening libs. That Myers-Briggs is underrated to EA rationalists. Or that behavioural genetics is underrated to Deutschians. I’ve brought up woke points to based friends and based points to woke friends.

Maybe contrarianism pushes me in certain ways.

On the other side there’s social desirability bias. Bryan Caplan’s favourite explanation for understanding the world. It’s quite simple: People like to say stuff that sounds good to others. Gender IQ differences (on average, on average, of course, of course) probably isn’t one of those things. 

It’s not just that people self-censor. It’s stronger: Saying Bad Thing makes you look bad to others, but thinking Bad Thing makes you seem bad to yourself. No one wants to be a bad person.

And some views actually make you a bad person, morally speaking.

It’s hard to know in given instances if Bad Thing is actually morally bad or it’s just against the consensus within the culture. Especially when the culture is this tidal force that crushes into the foundations of your world view.

Which bias dominates? Do I like the spicy stuff because it’s spicy or am I eschewing the spicy stuff by asking for isolated demands for rigor.

It’s not just contrarianism versus social desirability bias we have to worry about. There’s also the much stronger ingroup bias. This can team up with either of first two depending on the person and issue.

Since I’m a dude I may be more sympathetic to the men have higher IQ fact (on average, on average, of course). My sister might be less sympathetic to this fact.

For this particular topic, for me, it might be something like this:

But what if I was a progressive dude? My in group bias would be on the other side because this type of fact is anathema to the left.

Obviously, this plays out in different ways depending on the claim and the person. The point being that, in practice, it’s hard to calibrate to what extent the different drivers are at play.

Am I a soy conformist snowflake or a borderline evil racist edgelord?

Like everyone, I contain multitudes.

But am I enough of a soy conformist snowflake or borderline evil racist edgelord?

Hard to know, really.