« Nanny state alert | Main | Not In Their Agora »

February 27, 2005

Empirical Dogma

Will Wilkinson:

Assignment: Write an article about how YOUR ideology embodies true blue commitment to just-the-facts empiricism while in fact demonstrating the kind of confirmation bias that makes just-the-facts empiricism all but chimerical in political discourse. Jonathan Chait: A+!

As they say, read the whole things, Chait's article for its superciliousness and Wilkinson's for its brilliance (via Jane Galt). Mind, I don't mean to say that Chait's ideological opponents can't be prone to the same pitfalls; it just happens that he decided to stick his head through this particular pillory.

Bob Formaini touched on this attitude last month at TCS:

But of course our beliefs, unlike the silly, stupid beliefs of our political opponents, are factual, and scientifically proven. (The fact that science absolutely proves nothing escapes most Americans, whether well-educated or not). Their own beliefs are, for them, obviously -- even self-evidently -- true, while their opponents can only claim to believe otherwise because they are evil or possibly misled by cunning politicians. What other explanation can there be for people believing the idiotic things that I don't believe? All such alleged beliefs must, therefore, be mendacious. Let the screaming begin!

Paradoxically, delving into the empirical underpinnings of our favourite policy prescriptions can demean rather than elevate the debate. As our priors are submerged, we lose sight of the decisions upon which reasonable people can disagree -- perhaps even losing the ability to agree to disagree. This was a lesson I learned from several learned professors as a budding technocrat: don't disparage the opinions of policymakers just because they are stupid. Try to respect them; you have to work with these people.

Posted by Zach Wendling at February 27, 2005 01:27 PM

Comments

Posted by: Scof at February 27, 2005 05:56 PM | permalink