Bias

2011-11-23T03:33:17Z

Chistdude:

{{Disambiguation}}

'''Bias''' has numerous meanings. It literally means ''diagonal'' or ''slant.''

== Electronics ==

Bias is a [[DC]] voltage level added to an [[AC]] signal which is to be amplified. This is done to put the AC signal within the amplifying transistor's linear operating area.

Bias is also a name for a high-frequency sine wave added to an audio signal as part of the process of magnetic tape recording; it eliminates distortion that would otherwise be caused by magnetic hysteresis.

== Statistics ==

Bias means flaws in the collection, analysis or interpretation of research data that lead to incorrect conclusions.<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#b</ref>

== Psychology ==

A bias is sometimes defined as a violation of a normative standard. For example, the fact that people will be less likely to trade an object they already have for another one--regardless of which object they initially possess--violates the normative standard that preference for an object should not be swayed by what is already possessed.

Studies of biases in psychology have shown that many principles assumed in economics are incorrect (Kahneman 2003) by illustrating that the notion of a free [[rational agent]] is idealistic.

== Encyclopedias ==

In works describing a potentially controversial topic, '''bias''' refers to the tendency of an author who holds a particular viewpoint to express that viewpoint (whether intentionally or subconsciously) in his work. This typically goes against the ideal of compendiums which are meant to be neutral, such as encyclopedias. For example, if an article on [[abortion]] is written by someone who supports it, it will likely be biased towards that viewpoint, and vice versa.

Conservapedia, unlike Wikipedia has no bias, for example if an article on [[abortion]] is written by someone who supports it, it will likely not be biased towards that viewpoint, only if from a conservative viewpoint.

==History==
*... far too much historical scholarship consists of contorting the evidence to fit ideological models. The worst examples of such contortions are the Nazi and Communist histories of the early- and mid-twentieth century. [http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/russell/FlatEarth.html]

== See also ==
*[[Media bias]]
*[[Liberal bias]]
*[[Conservative bias]]
*[[Liberal quotient]]
*[[Essay: Accuracy vs. neutrality on Conservapedia]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Disambiguation Pages]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]

Circular reasoning

2011-11-23T03:28:24Z

Chistdude: Added example of circular reasoning and added why belief in the Bible is different from belief in the Quran

{{merge from|Beg the question}}
'''Circular reasoning''' is a form of [[Logical fallacy#Proof by assertion|proof by assertion]], often used by [[Atheist|Atheists]] and [[evolutionist]]s in which one uses a conclusion of an argument as a [[premise]] to that same argument, that is, ending where it began. This is also known as ''petitio principii'' or ''begging the question.''

It is considered invalid and therefore is not permitted by the rules of [[formal logic]].

== An analysis ==
The simplest argument is a single inference, as per the Law of Detachment:

*If P, then Q.
*P.
*Therefore, Q.

The Law of the Syllogism uses Detachment to establish an ''intermediate'' conclusion between the original premise and the eventual conclusion. Thus:

*If P, then Q.
*If Q, then R.
*Therefore, if P, then R.
*P.
*Therefore, Q and R.

''Contraposition'' uses Detachment in reverse to show that a thing is ''not'' true:

*If P, then Q.
*Not Q.
*Therefore, not P.

All these proofs start with a proposition already verified or denied.

This is the classic structure of circular reasoning, that is an abuse of the Law of the Syllogism:

*If P, then Q.
*If Q, then R.
*If R, then P.
*P.
*Therefore, Q.
*Therefore, R.
*Therefore, P.

Each of these three conditional statements would be valid by itself. Together, they create a flawed argument, because P now depends on itself to be true. The line of reasoning ends where it began, and is thus a circle. The only difference between this and ''proof by assertion'' is that the latter attempts to use a single conditional statement--"if P, then P"--while circular reasoning uses at least two, and typically three or more, syllogisms.

Circular arguments can be very difficult to detect. Circular arguments found in the professional literature, or in [[propaganda]], typically use five or six (or more) syllogisms.

Every logical system ''must'' begin with a set of generally accepted assumptions called ''postulates'' or ''axioms'' (from the [[Greek]] '''αξιος''' or ''axios'' worthy or deserving). Similarly, any set of definitions must start with a set of fundamental terms that need no definition. An axiom is usually a fundamental property of nature upon which all agree. Persons attempting to show that something is a fundamental property of nature when it is not, or a value of that property that is contrary to fact, typically use circular reasoning to make such an attempt.
==Examples==
*Atheists use circular logic to "disprove" the existence of [[God]]. That is, they presuppose that God does not exist and then argue that all proofs for the existence of God must be flawed because He does not exist. Christians can use [[presuppositional apologetics]] to break the circle of the atheists' circular reasoning.
*[[Muslim]]s also use circular logic to defend the [[Qur'an]]. They argue that the Qur'an is true because it is the Word of [[Allah]], that it is the Word of Allah because it says so, and that we can rely on it because it is true. This is '''completely''' [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge |different]] from why the [[Bible]] is true, this can be evidenced by the fact that God says this in the Bible.
*[[Evolutionist]]s will claim that a fossil is millions of years old because that is the date given by [[radiometric dating]]; then state that it is reliable because they "know" that the fossil is millions of years old due to the [[strata]] in which it was found; additionally because the radiometric dating methods agree with each other, and date correctly materials which were historically dated by humans.
*All other religions and philosophies that contradict Christianity use this same circular reasoning because the Bible and Jesus' love is evidence of God's existence.
==See also==
*[[No true Scotsman]], a specific example of circular reasoning
== Reference ==

* [http://creationwiki.org/Circular_reasoning Circular reasoning] by [[CreationWiki]]

[[Category:Logical Fallacies]]
[[Category:Liberal Traits]]

Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Bias

Circular reasoning