Hacker News Reader

Are you as well doubting Amnesty International findings simply because they are anti-torture? What is wrong with people having convictions and spending money to find facts that support these convictions?

I find the trend towards quick character assassination (rather than looking at the facts) quite annoying. We see it in climate debate, for example, way too often.

View on HN

"What is wrong with people having convictions and spending money to find facts that support these convictions?"

That's rationalization instead of rationality. Rationality dictates discovering the facts BEFORE you reach the conclusions.

They're still actual facts that other people can use to reach their own conclusions.

Cleverly omitted are other actual facts that other people can use to reach conclusions other than your own.

Maybe an adversarial method would be a better way of addressing these issues in practice, but only when we're responsible enough to read both sides.

Also, it's intellectually dishonest to pick your conclusions first and find the facts later. Even if CATO finds good facts (I'm sure they do), there is most definitely something "wrong with" them.

maybe I should have added the disclaimer - I donate to the CATO institute. I don't doubt the findings, I doubt their value as a political tool because everyone will say "they came from the CATO institute!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com