The Myth of being "non-biased"

(Part I: Yes I am biased, because it is impossible to be otherwise and still remain human)

In a recent note I have been accused of being biased. To the person that accused me of such I have one thing to say -- "Thank you."

What does this mean?Does it mean that I discriminate based on race, gender, ethnic group, political affiliation, etc.? NO.

Does it mean that I do not examine issues and causes before forming a conviction of my conscience? NO.

What it does mean is that I have come to examine the factors that have contributed to my current make-up. What are the psychological, sociological political, social, environmental, and cultural experiences that shapes the paradigm through which I see the world and assess it? I must recognize that all of these factors, and many more, contribute to the rich tapestry of who I am. Each person also possesses his own rich tapestry of "person-hood." In asking how these factors serve as the lens through which I see the world, I am also recognizing that I see the world from a particular point of view, namely mine. This is my bias. Guess what -- we all have a bias.

It seems like one of the "ultimate values" of the current cultural-social matrix of the west since political-cultural-social revolutions of the twentieth century has been above all things to be unbiased. Where does this come from? Much ink has spilt over this. Some ground it in the scientific revolution, some in the enlightenment, some in the great massacre of all values and morals during the two world wars. It is not my objective to spill more ink on this. So know we stand at a point that the only voice that "can be trusted" in the public square is the voice of the "non-biased person." At first look is very attractive. The society that all of us live in is very diverse. It is not just a plurality, but a number of systems of belief and values existing side -by-side, some of them incompatible among each other. In the true and good intention then to not infringe upon anyone system of beliefs, it is thought best to always make decisions concerning the public square from a non-biased point of view.

Yes -- this is a good and holy desire. It follows from the true dignity of each human person that a majority ought not snuff out the belief of the minority. The problem though is obtaining this non-biased point of view. Can a person really be removed from all the rich tapestry that forms them, so that he can stand separate from them and make a non-biased decision? I think this is very difficult, if not outright impossible. There simply is not such thing as "a view from no-where." This is affirmed in the modern philosophy of science, and holds true from this physical level onto the metaphysical level.

My religious, cultural, social, familial background neccesarily contributes to who I am. Human dignity and the values that modern democracy stands on says that who I am, and what I say has value, that it matters. This is true of myself, but also true of ever person. In the determination to be "non-biased," there is a strong demand to neutralize how my religious, spiritual, cultural, social and familial background colors my decisions, opinions, and values. It is a demand to deny myself -- my own humanity, and as much as there is a strong push for every person to be "non-biased," this demand is for every person to deny his own humanity. Not only "non-biased" view point an impossible objective to reach, it is inhumane, since it necessarily follows that in order to be non-biased a person has to deny the very fabric of his own humanity.
I typed in "a view from nowhere" into Google image search, and this is the first item that came up. It is confused and hazy, just like the current public moral reasoning. It just needs the right lens and everything will be pulled into focus.