Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Keywords

Bias, deception, lies, manipulation, persuasion, self-deception, social influence bias

Start Date

18-5-2016 9:00 AM

End Date

21-5-2016 5:00 PM

Abstract

The brain is composed of mutually inconsistent modules that contain contradictory beliefs. What consequences could this view have on argumentation? In order to sketch an answer, first the family of concepts of what is called generalized deception is discussed; then, this discussion is applied to the problem of the social influence bias to observe both how the mind works strategically wrong and what kind of arguments are used within this mental design in a social argumentative context.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Reader's Reactions

Brian MacPherson Dr., Commentary on Santibanez’s “Strategically wrong: bias and argumentation” (May 2016)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
May 18th, 9:00 AM May 21st, 5:00 PM

“Strategically wrong”: bias and argumentation

University of Windsor

The brain is composed of mutually inconsistent modules that contain contradictory beliefs. What consequences could this view have on argumentation? In order to sketch an answer, first the family of concepts of what is called generalized deception is discussed; then, this discussion is applied to the problem of the social influence bias to observe both how the mind works strategically wrong and what kind of arguments are used within this mental design in a social argumentative context.