“If a conclusion is attractive, I’m tempted to lower my standards”, This is a quote of Berkeley’s professor Richard Muller, meaning that he would be tempted to consider a conclusion to be true, despite that the logics behind the conclusion was flawed – conditional probability judgment. But he did not lower his standards, which makes me wondering who would; especially if an unattractive but objectively logical conclusion would be at odds with common consensus, threatening beloved dogma’s.
Actually, I wonder if it has ever been researched how much conditional probability judgment can be related to Myers Briggs personality types, more specifically,
the four temperaments as defined by David Keirsley. Who would commit noble cause corruption more easily? The rationalists (NT), the idealists (NF), the artisans (SP) or the guardian(SJ)? Obviously, predictions are easy to make. However, even more importantly, can such a investigation be strictly objective or would the researcher fall into the trap, that he was researching? Cherry picking, cooking or doctering data, in order to prove his prediction to be right?