Do you realize you made several accusations against me, provided no facts to bolster them, and accused me of having "visible bias"? This communicates to me that when you hear something you agree with, you believe it to be "objective fact", but that anyone who disagrees is obviously "biased".
One of the things I am careful about, personally, is distinguishing between what I know, what I don't know, and what I believe. I cited facts that I know to be true, some that are obvious opinions (Eg: significance of something by definition is an opinion and "shows visible bias") and put forth hypothesis (e.g.: what I believe, and that is that there's an ideology at work here.)
If you don't see the "pretty visible bias" in things that you agree with, I think that can lead to mistakes. I recommend trying to find the faults in the arguments of people you agree with. If you can do that, you can produce even stronger arguments for your position, and you keep your mind sharp.
Anyway, as for the topic at hand, your response only serves provide supporting evidence for my hypothesis about ideology. I believe if that hypothesis were wrong, you'd have not made accusations against me, or if you did, you'd have supported them with facts, and that your primary objection wold be to an error of fact, or an error of belief on my part.
But in doing so, you provide a good example of what I'm talking about by ideology. Ideology is an act of faith, whereby you take your beliefs from another person or group, sans evidence, or by accepting their claims.
If you were responding to me on a philosophical basis, or simply on a factual basis, you would have had at your ready disposal philosophical (e.g.: logical) arguments, or specific facts that contradict my claims.
Please don't take offense here, none is intended. I'm simply disagreeing with you and explaining my perspective vis-a-vis your comments.
But this is also why I hesitate to post comments like the one you'r replying to to Hacker News. I don't find the charge of "pretty visible bias" (etc) to be.... interesting.... at all. (And the down votes I see I'm getting, for the "crime" of pointing out that the above response was personal rather than on the point, serve to further confirm my hypothesis. Hell, I even said "please don't take offense here" in response to someone who accused me of lying, but didn't even bother to be specific about what I was allegedly lying about!)
One of the things I am careful about, personally, is distinguishing between what I know, what I don't know, and what I believe. I cited facts that I know to be true, some that are obvious opinions (Eg: significance of something by definition is an opinion and "shows visible bias") and put forth hypothesis (e.g.: what I believe, and that is that there's an ideology at work here.)
If you don't see the "pretty visible bias" in things that you agree with, I think that can lead to mistakes. I recommend trying to find the faults in the arguments of people you agree with. If you can do that, you can produce even stronger arguments for your position, and you keep your mind sharp.
Anyway, as for the topic at hand, your response only serves provide supporting evidence for my hypothesis about ideology. I believe if that hypothesis were wrong, you'd have not made accusations against me, or if you did, you'd have supported them with facts, and that your primary objection wold be to an error of fact, or an error of belief on my part.
But in doing so, you provide a good example of what I'm talking about by ideology. Ideology is an act of faith, whereby you take your beliefs from another person or group, sans evidence, or by accepting their claims.
If you were responding to me on a philosophical basis, or simply on a factual basis, you would have had at your ready disposal philosophical (e.g.: logical) arguments, or specific facts that contradict my claims.
Please don't take offense here, none is intended. I'm simply disagreeing with you and explaining my perspective vis-a-vis your comments.
But this is also why I hesitate to post comments like the one you'r replying to to Hacker News. I don't find the charge of "pretty visible bias" (etc) to be.... interesting.... at all. (And the down votes I see I'm getting, for the "crime" of pointing out that the above response was personal rather than on the point, serve to further confirm my hypothesis. Hell, I even said "please don't take offense here" in response to someone who accused me of lying, but didn't even bother to be specific about what I was allegedly lying about!)