What does it mean to "approach objectivity?" Why "cultivate" a worldview?

_{Picture all your beliefs assembled into the form of a tree - each branch is a belief that stems from another. The shape of this tree is your model of reality from atop which you view the world (hence we call it a worldview). An objective worldview is model that perfectly aligns with reality. Every branch is a true belief.  Given the limitations of the human mind, no human can be objective. However, we can strive to better align our worldview with reality, to hold beliefs that foster consistent and reliable predictions (i.e. they are true for all practical purposes). The more aligned one's beliefs are with reality, the greater one's capacity to navigate the world safely, unlock further knowledge, and engineer future outcomes. We use this philosophy to update scientific knowledge and successfully engineer technology, so why not apply it to life?}

Reality is an Ambigram

Reality is an ambigram observed from many perspectives and filtered through lenses tinted by experience, biology, and ideology. The scientific dialectic, applied to thought, guided by logic and evidence, seeks to clarify the personal lens, minimize bias, and provide a clearer picture of what we practically assume is reality. Through this internal process, one does not gain truth, but approaches objectivity through the minimization of uncertainty.

Science is A Process

We are subjective creatures limited in perspective by fallible senses evolved from eons of selective evolution. Science is not a body of facts, but a method for minimizing biases in the construction of coherent models of reality through a continued re-evaluation of claims and beliefs about the world. In short, science is the employment of coherent reasoning and evidence in pursuit of accurate claims about the world; i.e. claims that offer predictable results and thus can be assumed true for practical purposes.

Reframe Why We Discuss

While much of political discourse in today's society centers around debate, seeking to win an argument, scientific discourse centers around the dialectic. In its broadest terms, a dialectic is when two or more people with opposing perspectives discuss, not to win an argument, but for each to gain insight, challenge one's beliefs, and approach truth. However, dialectic thinking can also be performed introspectively within one's own head through conceptual steel-men.

Fight Pseudo-science, not Mis-information

Pseudoscience is a way of thinking / research that appears sound and scientific, but fails in one or more aspects of logical and/or empirical coherence. Pseudoscientific beliefs are often accepted as true based upon unjustified faith in a narrative or hypotheses, often supported by some evidence, but not coherent with all evidence (e.g. cherry picking), relying on absence of evidence, correlation without mechanism of causation, and various fallacies or uncritical biases. We target flawed methods of thinking, not facts or people. Determining truth is difficult, but spotting illogical thought can be easy.

Free Thinking from Biases

Strict adherence to tribal affiliations, norms of identity categories, and cultural taboos in thought can act as barriers to analyzing the coherency of beliefs and claims about the world. Awareness of these barriers are helpful in recognizing what factors bias our thinking in directions other than seeking truth. We cannot eliminate biases, but we can minimize their influences

Rationally Delegate Cognition

Cognitive Delegation is when we delegate the work of cognition to another; whether that be a doctor in regard to our health, a commercial when it comes to drugs, a celebrity when it comes to politics, or a friend when it comes to deciding where to eat. We cannot investigate the truth of every claim, so we delegate our cognition. However, delegating cognition can act as a crutch, pushing the risk and responsibility of thinking onto others. Overreliance becomes addictive, making us vulnerable to manipulation, groupthink, and hinders the development of independent problem-solving skills and effective reasoning. Those who delegate too little, learn little, but those who delegate too much fall into tribal thought. Choose sources wisely and spot irrational arguments.