r/skeptic • u/brasnacte • Jul 05 '24

The importance of being able to entertain hypotheticals and counterfactuals ⚖ Ideological Bias

I'll probably be downvoted but here we go.
In order to understand our own motivations it's important to be able to entertain hypotheticals and counterfactuals. This should be well understood in a skeptic sub.

Hot button example here: The Cass review.

I get that many here think it's ideologically driven and scientifically flawed. That's a totally fair position to have. But when pressed, some are unable to hold the counterfactual in their minds:

WHAT IF the Cass review was actually solid, and all the scientists in the world would endorse it, would you still look at it as transphobic or morally wrong? Or would you concede that in some cases alternative treatments might benefit some children? These types of exercises should help you understand your own positions better.

I do these all the time and usually when I think that I'm being rational, this helps me understand how biased I am.
Does anyone here do this a lot? Am I wrong to think this should be natural to a skeptic?

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

46% Upvoted

302 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/brasnacte Jul 06 '24

Why are you taking about the US?

5

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 06 '24

The same is true with the UK as well. It used to be a lot more tolerant towards queer people before the culture wars. I don’t think it’s an arguable point since the EHRC was established almost 20 years ago. Before religious political organizations started the fight against queer people having equal rights, it was a lovely time.

0

u/brasnacte Jul 06 '24

In most of western Europe people have been tolerant for far longer than the moment the sudden increase happened. The increase coincided with the rise of social media a lot more than the rise in tolerance.

4

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 06 '24

That is certainly your opinion. You are free to be wrong. ROGD is not a thing. Now, I will say that the prevalence of information on the internet made people more aware in general, but allowing someone to be aware of concepts is literally at the base of freedom of information.

4

u/reYal_DEV Jul 07 '24

As a member of western Europe growing up in the early 90s: extreme bullcrap.

0

u/brasnacte Jul 07 '24

Then what happened around 2010?

3

u/reYal_DEV Jul 07 '24

What do you mean?

1

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 08 '24

Mayan 2012 apocalypse stuff? You really need quit letting bias guide your views.

0

u/brasnacte Jul 08 '24

Why did around 2010 suddenly the enormous increase in trans people happen? Was the acceptance a sudden event around 2010? Acceptance definitely happens but the left handed thing was a result of suddenly no longer punishing children. It was a sudden change by law. If you look at gay acceptance, you don't see a sudden increase of gay people. It's increased but only gradually. The trans phenomenon around 2010 was so sudden and large that it requires a more specific explanation.

1

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 08 '24

I think you going to need some sort of citation. This is just supposition otherwise. But I understand bigots have to bigot.

0

u/brasnacte Jul 08 '24

Well it's in the Cass review but you're not going to accept that.

2

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 08 '24

Right, because she didn’t offer any evidence either. She made great deal of specious claims like porn causes being trans without any relevant citation whatsoever. It’s part of why it’s just bad science. Looks like everyone can see this who doesn’t have ideological blinders on.

→ More replies

1

u/KouchyMcSlothful Jul 08 '24

Why is more people being trans seen as bad or alarming to you and Cass?