A few more thoughts. If I understand the Time journalist/blogger James Poniewozik correctly then being:
Objective - is to present the facts but no conclusions regarding them Neutral - is to a) present the facts, b) to provide your conclusion regarding those facts and c) to remain open to a new conclusion if/when new facts become available While an: Opinion - is to present your conclusion without having many facts/research to support it Agenda - is to interpret all the facts and research you come across (or choose to look at) with a particular pre-determined point of view So it sounds like "neutral" is the approach we would like to take (since, as Poniewozik said in this article, "...someone who simply processes information yet is unable or unwilling ever to draw conclusions from it would not be considered very useful."), but we should acknowledge that as human beings we do have our built-in fallacies and cognitive biases which make this difficult. Just trying to get this straight in my own head I guess. Michael Britt [email protected] http://www.thepsychfiles.com Twitter: mbritt On Nov 24, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Jim Clark wrote: > Hi > > We can be more or less objective. Moreover, we are more likely to be > objective if we aspire to being objective (i.e., try to be sensitive to our > biases) and if we follow well-developed principles for identifying, reducing, > minimizing, and perhaps eliminating bias (i.e., the repertoire of scientific > tools generically referred to as research methods). > > Take care > Jim > > > > James M. Clark > Professor of Psychology > 204-786-9757 > 204-774-4134 Fax > [email protected] > >>>> "Louis E. Schmier" <[email protected]> 24-Nov-10 10:26 AM >>> > I think the question should be "Can we be objective?" > > Make it a good day > > -Louis- > > > Louis Schmier > http://www.therandomthoughts.edublogs.org > Department of History http://www.therandomthoughts.com > Valdosta State University > Valdosta, Georgia 31698 /\ /\ /\ /\ > /\ > (O) 229-333-5947 /^\\/ \/ \ /\/\__ / \ > / \ > (C) 229-630-0821 / \/ \_ \/ / \/ /\/ / \ > /\ \ > //\/\/ /\ > \__/__/_/\_\/ \_/__\ \ > /\"If you want to climb > mountains,\ /\ > _ / \ don't practice on mole > hills" - / \_ > > On Nov 24, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Jim Clark wrote: > > Hi > > Yes! That is, we should "seek, acknowledge and interpret objective > evidence, even when it conflicts with our preconceptions or with what we > wish to be true." Are you thinking that we should NOT try to base and > revise our beliefs on objective evidence? > > Take care > Jim > > James M. Clark > Professor of Psychology > 204-786-9757 > 204-774-4134 Fax > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > Michael Britt <[email protected]> 24-Nov-10 10:03 AM > > I recently interviewed Adele Faber, co-author of several parenting > books. As I edited the audio file for my podcast it occurred to me that > it will be clear to the listener that I agree with her ideas regarding > parenting (which are clearly more "Rogerian" than "Skinnerian"). But > aren't I supposed to be, as a psychology instructor "objective"? > > I've been turning this over in my head for the past few days and I > don't know if others find this issue of concern, but today I came across > an article in Time magazine by James Poniewozik. He's talking about the > supposed objectivity of journalists, but I think what he has to say is > relevant to us: > > "...what journalists and people who talk about them generally call > "objectivity" is not actual objectivity, but something more like > "neutrality" (often a false and labored one). Objectivity does not mean > having no opinion, taking no side or expressing no point of view. > [Objectivity] means seeking, acknowledging and interpreting objective > evidence, even when it conflicts with your preconceptions or with what > you wish to be true. You can have subjective beliefs*because we all > do*and yet subordinate them to objective evidence." > > Your thoughts on whether we should try to be "neutral"? > > Michael > > Poniewozik article: > http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/11/16/olbermann-jousts-koppel-in-battle-of-high-horses/#ixzz16DElMZfp > > > > Michael Britt > [email protected] > http://www.thepsychfiles.com > Twitter: mbritt > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6718 > > > or send a blank email to > leave-6718-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13368.9b8fe41d7a9a359029570f1d2ef42440&n=T&l=tips&o=6719 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6719-13368.9b8fe41d7a9a359029570f1d2ef42...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6720 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6720-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13405.0125141592fa9ededc665c55d9958f69&n=T&l=tips&o=6724 > or send a blank email to > leave-6724-13405.0125141592fa9ededc665c55d9958...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6725 or send a blank email to leave-6725-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
