The underlying factors are less amenable to positive verification. That is the level at which the inquiry becomes abstract and most people are left behind. For example, look at the vast majority of the kind of discussions that occur here: who stood where, how many shots were fired, where was someone hit, etc (the Morganís belly button lint stuff). These are important pieces of evidence on which the abstract level of inquiry must rely, but ultimately it is the abstract level of conceptualization that determines the significance of the belly button lint, not vice versa. Differently stated, it is the holistic level of oneís cognitive view that provides the framework around and in which the bits of information are ultimately made into some kind of coherent explanation. Whence the need to look for bias in the first place. Again, the key is to think both levels (whole and part) at the same time, thereby nullifying, to the extent possible, the deficiencies inherent when looking at only one side of the coin of human cognition. The problem is that this third, abstract level depends on the synthesis of whole and part and one can never completely fill in the gap that exists between the two.
Very interesting Chris, as I am trying to become more neutral in my approach without supporting evidence. That being said there are a number of things in this Tombstone story that really don't make... more