Do you think a bias makes a source uselss to you?

Answer 1

I don't mean to quibble, but in theory every single source you come across that engages with any idea at any level of complexity is intrinsically biased. Because language is necessarily slippery--the ideas it brings to mind carries a "charge" of connotation to varying degrees--it's hard to escape bias to any meaningful degree.

As a result, as the prior poster suggested, bias is something that often needs to be accounted for, but it doesn't negate the usefulness of a source. That's while you'll often see enemies (pro-life vs. pro-choice, Christians and atheists, liberals and conservatives) recruiting the same sources, tailoring them to fit the arguments they're individuallly setting forth by clarifying what the bias means to them.

Answer 2

Yes I do. If you are going to trust your bias without an objective view or opinion, what do you think you will get from any source. Yuo would obviously not believe that source if you already had aaan opinion about the subject. If you had an open mind you would be more able to view the broader picture and maybe get a more genuine response instead of a predetermined thought that no matter what any source tells you, you already know what you know and no one can change your mind.

Answer 3

Not at all. If the source acknowledges the bias that I see no problem at all. As a matter of fact it would lend some degree of credibility to his/her statements and allows the reader to gauge the value of the sources information.

But you must understand that there is a bias.....not to balance the source with another in opposition to their statements would tarnish your article as "bias".

Answer 4

It depends. If the bias is recognized and acknowledged, then the source can be used accordingly.

Answer 5

Everything written is written with bias especially history.