User:Blue Hoopy Frood/Essays/Manifesto

==Manifesto==

===Preamble=== I became mired in conflict last fall because I naively assumed that Wikipedians would appreciate having logical flaws in articles pointed out. Instead, folks defended their cherished beliefs with the passion of religious fanatics. Because I challenged their faith, they labeled me as anti-science. If you are one of those culture warriors, here to dig up dirt on me (or even if you have less malevolent motives), let me tell you a little bit about myself.

Background
I was raised as an intellectual in a family of intellectuals. We worshipped the mind, believing we could master our environment through our superior understanding. I assumed all intellectuals are arrogant, and so justified my own arrogance.

I was also a compulsive skeptic, habitually poking holes in every argument I came across (which is much easier than formulating my own arguments, BTW). I still am, and still do. This compulsive skepticism can be a blessing in scientific and scholarly environments where people welcome constructive criticism and collaboration. It is a curse when people are defensive about their beliefs, particularly when the criticism is delivered with arrogance. It is likewise a curse when I want to believe certain matters by faith and have trouble doing so.

Freshman year of college, I vowed I would never believe anything I could not prove; knowing perfectly well that one cannot prove anything without depending on unprovable underlying assumptions. Thus, I effectively vowed that I would never believe anything. That didn’t stick.

I graduated from Carnegie Mellon before the term Internet had been introduced to the popular lexicon. At that time, CMU refused to offer an undergraduate computer science degree, because they didn’t think any company would hire someone whose education was so narrow. Over a decade later, I returned to school for a graduate degree in a discipline that relies heavily on machine learning. Since then, I have mainly worked with government clients to solve wicked problems involving vast amounts of data. I was a data scientist before data science was cool.

It was at grad school that a fellow student confronted me about my arrogance, and forever changed the way I view myself and my profession. I am still prone toward arrogance, but now view this as a flaw to be overcome, rather than a badge of honor.

Wikipedia
I discovered Wikipedia somewhere around 2005. (This account came later.) Ever since, I have been an avid consumer and casual contributor, mostly correcting typos, adding internal links, and the like. Before last fall, I used to tell friends and acquaintances that Wikipedia is the most reliable introductory source of information on virtually everything, aside from current events. I no longer believe that, having become acutely aware of systemic bias. Wikipedia is still my go-to for information on most topics, but whereas I used to assume the information was true until proven otherwise, now I am less credulous (or, dare I say, more realistic).

The upshot of last fall’s controversy is that I was hounded by someone whose avowed purpose was to “crush” me for my unbelief. I appealed for help from the Wikipedia community, but none was forthcoming. Waging culture wars is not high on my list of ambitions, so I chose instead to retire this account. I resurrect it now with the notion of perhaps re-addressing some of the issues that were summarily dismissed because of my iconoclasm. However, if the effort again proves futile, I’m out of here.

Invitation to dialog
I welcome opportunities for mutually respectful discussion/debate, and particularly invite folks to point out holes in my arguments, politely. Don’t be surprised if I do likewise.

Do I have biases? Of course. So do you. That doesn’t mean we can’t get along like civilized people. If you see evidence of unconscious bias in my claims, here or elsewhere, please let me know, gently.

I have no desire to argue about matters of faith. Science has little bearing on such debates, and no one is likely to be persuaded. On the other hand, I am always happy to discuss matters of faith in an effort to improve mutual understanding.

I will not respond to diatribes against me. If you are incapable of civility, I won’t waste my time on you.