Confirmation Bias in Evidence

The definition of evidence is “The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true of valid.” In other words evidence is some sort of proof proving something to be true. When you look at the definition of evidence it seems simple to understand on the surface but there are so many layers in how we perceive evidence given to us. In her chapter “Evidence” Kathryn Schultz talks about the ways human cognition can play a role in how we perceive evidence, inductive reasoning and confirmation bias being some examples. Inductive reasoning is the way we use logic to reach a probable conclusion based on past experiences and confirmation bias is to seek out or ignore evidence to fit our beliefs. Kathryn Shultz gives an example of these by telling a story about how a woman used her inductive reasoning she believed the Orion constellation is a summer constellation and should only be seen in the summer. Even though a friend pointed it out to her in the winter this woman still wholeheartedly believed it to be a summer constellation even with evidence to the contrary. Now this example is a less harmful one but there are others out there that have a much more harmful effect. Take politics for example. During election year there’s a presidential candidate from the republican and democrat side and during the presidential run each side is constantly presenting evidence on why the other person shouldn’t be president. Most of the time the evidence could be considered pretty sound but because of our confirmation bias we choose to keep insisting it’s not true without counterevidence. Our current president is a good example of that. He can be accused of something and there could be evidence proving it but he will just say “false” or “untrue” without giving us any counterevidence. Confirmation bias can also cause use to blatantly ignore evidence. You see this happening when people try to debate with news anchors. The news anchor will question their beliefs and present evidence against them and the person responding will choose not to answer certain questions that present evidence against their beliefs. This is a dangerous thing happening in the political climate especially. Evidence should be evident but human cognition can get in the way of logically processing the evidence. The best way to try avoid falling into these patterns of perceiving evidence is to keep an open mind and be aware of your own confirmation bias.