The article about Professor Emily Pronin (Life of the Mind, Dec. 4) regarding everyone’s “bias blind spot” is certainly a valid reminder of our primal tendencies toward self-interest and exaggerated assumptions of our own capacities. On the other hand, if we are all “hopelessly biased” in such fashion, how is it possible to achieve “reasoned analysis”? Isn’t Professor Pronin’s suggestion of “limiting exposure to potentially biasing information” as the “most effective defense against bias” somewhat unrealistic and contrary to the scientific method — shouldn’t all relevant information be considered? In exercising such a defense, should not a “reasoned analysis” be required to determine what is “potentially biasing” and what is not?
Professor Pronin serves us well in reminding us of human frailty, but it would be helpful to know her path to “reasoned analysis” — if there is one.