Thinking clearly: biases and good habits of mind
Good philosophy depends as much on noticing the shortcuts our minds take as on mastering formal logic.
Why minds take shortcuts
The brain constantly makes fast guesses from limited information, which is usually useful. Those shortcuts become cognitive biases when they systematically push us toward error. Confirmation bias leads us to notice evidence that fits what we already believe; anchoring makes the first number we hear weigh too heavily; the availability heuristic treats vivid, memorable cases as if they were common.
Habits that counter bias
Philosophers build habits to slow those errors down. The principle of charity means interpreting an opponent's view in its most reasonable form before criticising it. Steelmanning goes further and rebuilds the strongest version of the view. Epistemic humility means holding beliefs with the confidence the evidence supports, and being ready to say 'I might be wrong'.
Worked example: a charitable reply
Suppose someone says 'Homework is pointless.' An uncharitable reply mocks the claim as laziness. A charitable reply asks what a thoughtful person might mean: perhaps that large amounts of homework show little benefit for young students. Responding to that version, with evidence for and against, produces a real discussion instead of a point-scoring exchange, and it is the only version worth refuting.
Flashcard
Favouring evidence that supports what we already believe
Check your understanding
After buying a car, Jordan reads only reviews that praise that model and skips the critical ones. Which bias is this?