[citrablue]

It sounds like you believe people can behave more in line with the Rational Human used to model older economic theories. I'm not so sure confirmation, affinity, or proximity biases can be held down. What we need is a system that is either immune to these biases, or is designed to thwart them.

My opinion: individual's actions and beliefs do not put a dent in the tsunami of bias that swamps our brains. We need systemic thinking (e.g. science has a decent structure with double blind studies).

[mlthoughts2018]

I think a precondition of the entire discussion is that we’re talking about what’s more effective in resolving disagreement - which would be measured by whether a disagreement process approaches the conclusion that would be reached between two rational agents sharing their information.

Note that I am not saying I believe humans do act that way, rather that is the yardstick of outcome to decide if one disagreement resolution technique is better than another.

[harimau777]

Maybe the issue is different views of what the disagreement is over?

I tend to view the disagreement as being over policy not over rationalism/facts. If at the end of the discussion both people agree on the policy I see that as successful even if they still disagree on the evidence that supports that policy.