New Scientist article

In the Meetup ground from the last post, this New Scientist article was cited claiming both liberals and conservatives equally have the same level of confirmation bias. Indeed, liberals are dismissive of conservative claims on gun control, climate change and abortion because liberals present the scientific facts on those issues. To call that confirmation bias on the same order as conservative explanations for those same issues is ludicrous.

And of course we must differentiate educated liberals from ignorant ones. There are plenty of ignorant people that identify as liberals who are more prone to confirmation bias. But where are the progressive ideas coming from?


I joined New Scientist to read the article. In the referenced Journal of Experimental Psychology article it said: "Their lack of interest was not due to already being informed about the other side or attributable election fatigue." In this case "their" refers to both those liberals and conservatives polled. As I noted above, that includes ignorant liberals. But what would they find of those liberals who indeed were well informed of conservative arguments and based their own arguments on well-informed science?

The conclusion of the New Scientist article shows its own bias, using loaded terms like "Twisting science into a bludgeon for political opponents." Several of the studies we've looked at show that overall conservatives don't accept the science. Yes, science is for everybody, but one first has to accept the science.