Misplaced Pages

Controversy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:52, 18 July 2018 edit212.34.241.123 (talk) Baically love sex and menTag: Possible vandalism← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:47, 14 December 2024 edit undoPiotrus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,738 edits See alsoTag: 2017 wikitext editor 
(95 intermediate revisions by 66 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|State of prolonged public dispute or debate}}
DONALD THE DUCK TRUMP AMR7U5N5 8FGCBA4G ND6FWBV6 JXQBF6W3 XKYS64QB AM6XRADN JY5XB8PN A829BJRZ BWYPDCQ9 WT7G8W46 EGUEVUSH AARZ84LR 3KKQZKXE B6359MMZ S3DHQ74C 5FXNLWBZ NB9YUG63 N9B9FFJK 7U6ZBTBB E239FW7F FQU9WY8G W4N578SN 3WL869W2 LFBC3VE5 U45PF35W DKH5MB78 SPSKDWTT RS5XUK2G BU78SHJM 86MR7S68 A5H7DTJZ ADYGFPSV HBMZFEL6 DTDZ27NX GWSZ4K7L UNQ297BE H2LJHJJY RRNCMACY LL7YSKMV UKJCR69N LAX5P5EZ S83NMN8L LGP49E2G 6JUBGQPA SY8W2DJD 9A9CB4WA DRYH9JWK RGCUYEHU UV2AF7CF YEEZE9A2 KU8QNXX2 Q9BJ7K6X HBLJASCE 7T3UJFYW WXLQ8KZ6 JQJW9SBE K74Z6XQZ NVHVWQ6L 3V2ZXRLR M5XKHXLM ASZ24A3T T58PQQBD VEEKKF2P JG9YBZ6H G28K26VL NMSVMUQR TAGB4CML 9RBYDSWV SEQNVKD8 GR8CMXG6 JZQRWGYP JYWYCF46 SPX8P9JK P8VX3ECR 3X3T8D9F 7N3BREJJ ZTPE9KKC WAPECK96 225S2B8V FQPMXACU 2X3LWL7N 9WNX7SBB 78HTN2BP JBB2PJMB CSAEEX4X LZ92EZSP 645GQWSY RBAHNMD3 52SFLF4Q LYYSEU8B WGW5ABFY UHYLU3F4 LG6KRHFT AM24BMED BEZ4JDWA E7BFTAU9 C5XZCRK9 JATLYQUX K7GXLAPM ZBS2LFCK 2MHXJ2FM D9BZ2KSP DXNBPUH2 SV8UG6TZ YBKAEU4S REN55TVJ BP98SUYT 96TCTA8G G8YMBQWX EJPGQBG3 2D3PR5C7 RJFLKYWM 33UHQNYZ SE6528E9 LCU27KRT 66S8Z33L EXDXQVLM QX4AMU9H Z7BYWB2Y ZCVGQHE2 KZ4X42GF VPLTC94U VGFDTNW6 KPD6969B G5U9EE82 SC6J3CTZ KBVT9NJ3 ZTK9PBGP QYHZ2X4Q 5YJJ5VPS ZSWVULFJ LJTECS6L 2PM6P9BX TRA2KWQ4 DZM9EXQX TALRFP5H QA27RBQR X8LMCS8G 2JL6NAX8 SK39RDXB QSQ9C9CB JUCWVCT3 D42E7MUB 53596UU2 XS9MMDVQ AAFBR87Y ZUJVLVDH B5HE5YF7 QUUATV8Z FF25F7R2 7Z4VJPSN 9YX8XEP5 URXR3JXP WMCMR6DU WJJYHVSU KKASGLXV 7BVVSVRH 93EN9TXP TGUWE87U HDLKUQQZ XGJMCHNX SA55TVY8 4GPW9PFQ B35LNQEK WPSXYDJP SQFMLW9W RXCS6AEF MCGMWRWY SY9JKBTC 8Q83LRAL UEVFJJ2W ZRWGYJG3 NH6MM5GR 98CTUHHR TG9SGL68 KWFSLGB9 RUZSJGLS MC3N3ECX 2C4Q8BDF 3S9PW3JK HRYMQB55 X3WRTQWJ JCJYSF68 J3FDJSJP SKXYMRYG Q3H99XV3 U3CSJXDU A7QUZN4L AAWESDL2 Y8JGK59F 6VM2HVX8 47E76DHF C95DF9UD UU9VMJMV 8HE8NTZL Z787WWA9 Z6X32SFA DLVL426T W2WHT5VX HCR3LU9R 7XLGKBSN 2F3U9YUB 5EN4MV8T B2GNPVZU R2Q4TS3H 3WFD2BXT 75QEQNMW JVCLPC4N GA2T89TV 69PZWU53 9KFBASTV 7ES588P9 Y4GQK7H6 DZCHTDRB DKEGWBKE 7UGJL3DH ZX23G99G DDALDXKU 9VGVHYK8 5L2MPN57 Y72P5BZY JU5WPAA4 5XTYVJC7 7QCA85TZ JZRPLXNZ ABT6RGU9 F2YKGMF6 X6S9ADN8 J7PE7VXN J2WKGBPL U8JCNZ35 8WTCNQ7Z P3UWP26F Z9DC675G N54SAR4X RXZJEBBK 4UQCMHHU 8CV8LQ5J ZA462EZW A24Z8ZEB U37Q24UN BS82V3QE KB2B369A FMVT57PP 63ZKL6LK 3Q4QVBHH 75VU28G5 963CFPBQ KG9LQJZZ D7NNGSTT 3WCGL3XH 3SZZMACG U7E3CUEN XSE3XL5L 6E92T4G6 YP8T7ZKR 3654QGH8 HFYG6FZK QFFW4BQU RSRTP78P R8VDEBRW 9JTGXWYK 7QYGHY5R XZ26D9CX FM7YJZR4 F2BWXD9K 7JXQZND8 SUNHWMKC EEZVSS4V 8YXD2U2P S5H6FGN3 J9B8FJT9 Y7LURQSY 9NE34RB6 DL63QPSP FX6ULP4B KWYYUG67 X8T7V6MN GGX4ZSPK EUHUC3FM T3NAE59T 67XWAX92 CF8QNZZ7 NH4G3D3Q XQ8SRDEV 692G636Y FZP93BR9 H7M5TWVH 7HBBNRVK DKAZ6PNW JQH52P9V 6E53XUVD RQGADP6V JW5W27QR TG484NQZ 5J3R8V3N HXJ3V88Q DYBDKA55 H6VK3J2M H362MEB6 H2T7GMYS G5B5TYAH 23BWJQNB QQ8MXBC5 DRWPQZXE NDL8JEBZ XFV5MCRQ MS2ZECTH 542L4GVR MF46Y9BE Y6PJHFZ8 T6KSD6ES SSYAKD7Q VPEWV3KX KCJFRND7 MLRUP6QP YA5ZG6PJ H85PDJG8 RNSSEZ54 M4GKPLG4 6UMXH5E3 NDHGV47J MGJKMZED NCG73LWE XHRHY58P UKL5PAM5 K9RJPC7K CXV6LLGY 6R7FTC2P 8H4WYYK5 PSGR9ZPS 3YY3FUEZ UBYVKU2Z 6S238DQ3 BJR27FCA JY4CAQKR KX499J7J ZWFT7NZH Q9CT9C5S DEX74ZYS P4F5GYB4 82UDT28H HH9NYJKM NPFKPZHT HHX92ML7 QM2PPHCH KU75A5XN V2CLDA4F NNHQPF79 RGLNFDQB 7594UA89 SLAZ6U6V E4G78YZM CYW5VYMX UA4U7GBR U23MG4XA K4EW7QEB XZME8FFL MF93TE7G XBLJRZ86 U8VD9D6V 3TUEZU7S UD26WYMQ GZ77BYVX LBZSG6RM NTJT7KRD 5WH7LKWZ 2X7X92RE EQWPY9TY Z2WCW52V MMZSAJ9U UHM779RG APVWQHSW TTZDP8F8 8MSSCT69 LFJALJ2R 2CHRDHBJ UUKBBYZE MUREXF66 AHL24LH3 JTX84JRP VCM5XGDX ZUBVK9BW NLM9L5WM VGB97G2M VLR5VSVW DJZLD6HY JR9RJQRL 3TAEZ8F2 5LZ8VASF JATRP8YK K5EE4HWQ M4L59VDY TJ36HHRS JMGM83LY DEYKZ6EU NGNPC8Z9 WVXFEF6X WCFMLTY3 RJHAVLH3 WAWBPX38 SA5NLJL6 K6RQQ9L4 KTQTTKYE BPHV2669 FHRAGUAX XB2Y7FSY N37ESM2Q ZU96BEET C3NHC6PS BLQQCPSP 9XTBWLZV J8ZBE82S 9KP7QWD7 AYS9Z7KA B57ZP9F9 FDBNRB9C A7HLD9Z4 P32248LP G86RK8NY 4LTBKSJ6 K5R9EJZ9 VD366AH5 UQ2LBWSM RP67WVAN YPK3QPL2 GV69YJVK G2J5YSGQ A26TJRFU X42GWZ4Z 9LL6G3RC V9MEA7QB LQJZJ9VD 8MZYCUTW RW5HN937 PSUGZCY7 E7HL8TKN CQDKVPHN XZE99433 UCVEF4XY GMMZRC5F TL86SWHS 9E8QXZFN MN4HBL7B 86KCYRZR 6RJ4976F PWSYRQBM 43EYZH9D 6HWKQD3E GZFD43CR EM4NZE5V QNDQPKW3 FVHHNNXJ 4ACLGFG6 49D4YBWK QD8R4EDD WE4V7JSU GXCC2PUL 5EY5R38N BLSAAUR8 EC7XBYNE H73RMTC9 RS4NC9FZ T563BDV8 DBH26S3S RUUKB8EE G8Y656L4 WHXY4QYQ Z3YJMWDJ 4CZMCZJ3 YGHPV4XH DAPELXJW RRN98HW5 CX44H5LR 7R5L9EC8 9793TH5C Z7K389F2 GQWCGLGF HL2FNXTQ WAFEYXAA 25EALX85 KHSFN7XN N36JDN9U BCGRV977 YKTD4CV6 K26QT7Y6 2RCQUWN7 746Y2DC2 2QZSWJGB NJDK78XB GS3AJFLT ZWTFUYJZ 6EEZ84XB MWF32EU4 QZAX9SEL 3FJ2ZYC7 5D93VGQJ LZQVG5KM U48MQTUQ SKK33TFA TUQQHW9V 9CBEU2HV 44ZKB2RH GS634LAJ 6FRABREC GRY8WM43 VH9LL5TN LTBf8 XGT2LCKL EFG49YG9 9VV3H9JH KLMECQFK E66JXARC ELCFBNKB DTFQDY8Z VLP78DAA FMTJ7UCE ZZ265UWH NY99LA3A DBVUBKDB D4EWDMQ2 2BW9QNE9 WFYHKAJP Z2ZK3LRB YGHRQ7TU 4NLU8GTA 54BCQEB6 6CGVMUKV H25S9K2Z 5TQCSSN4 F3TZMJSU 3YJNPADK T2M5HCG8 NNFF48WE X3R4G6ZG Z24E6WF5 QKNCFWY7 ZHGN3SG9 ZRF237CP VSE5FVNY 8LDC55L9 X67STTGX PU8ZQYQ6 Z2WW2UKC D98ZC3R8 555GQU47 MXCCH3FH 83WEPH2W Q2RPA3QQ SBHELLJ3 ANT3BYH3 4YQGN8KC SNBXNJNN JVG5QWRZ JB3XJVBH KX5QREM4 Y7HT89AY GJF54ZZ3 6E4FKEJS GQZUEUKH SGV9D8AD LXH29U4X TSHLKF2U ETA57X7W UEMZXXPF LPQBU647 N8DFKBZU U5SHY42B FP9L3KQB QWKGJBAC LKV3GZNR 223GBVTQ GW7RLXJE WM8T7RK7 38AUS54V 4LDQYRZY M76U8RKT FZQ7HJQE WLC5NQEQ 84W6EX3U 75T2F7QB WBNK9GY5 H2R38654 4RGBS274 5BT2FU43 8D6S9TZE 9V4759AE 8J9VL24S Y8S9HRVJ 9YLPAHZ3 BRNVPD9F LTL78QTL 89HJFEUF XTGVKMZT Z2PDGF53 VS8CALUD YS9MEGD3 Y6VQP3R3 4MEZ2G7U Q6EXHAEV 547DP4BE 9PEGWR45 3MTKTM8Y T4Y2L2HK S6VZTQZC KDU7ZWPS BLHQRVFF MPZ76AV7 S8KTKUJN B2RZ65EQ HRAR3MYS 2HQTXNCV ED3ZVU87 AZ94FPDV Y3QD9DKT 4ADC9XY7 SCF93FS8 JSVLMGA8 782PTYMS 4P3H5XCZ M5NFXPJW 7XAU92FE Q7TLP6ZX 8YLQNRPK 33TBHZRW AXZL624M T4NFVML7 RHEXBYWP WYE5S4EZ 9V6S5WTT DSDWD4JZ 5PGEG696 X2ZJ5UKF TRWW9RCA PP29TG8L QPBSV4R3 ZN5M8GB8 RN6FPH9H VWLB7TUQ NX2CWPCA 3MDYL6XY UJTR3W98 CYVRR597 7KVRYM4B UBYK64PU L3C75XVJ 2R9BKSXKfe 8VYCZJUW TMV6GY26 B8KXWXET N26UMXCF ECMD2DSZ 6DXCRYFV WGBLDP5Z KN9FGXTK 53ECHNPT YSY5VVQJ C5MRK98P G7GRY78P 4CJLMPGC PZA64RAJ J6ZJ5PB2 RFECL93V WE4SSXAM PY9VQGKJ 9CBEEV5L MBY9KAWD 7J69PAB9 BQFRGZEN NPRLP79fE MWG2ePZ6K V3AAGUP7 VKR3FYGN 7UAHYYTB 5CZHZ6FL 4YSL8UU4 VCGNPJGV ABBUF87U FRGPCSNU GZHGWHCT V5V3GGJY YU73NCVX XT7BQ6V2 QKSUWZKX M57VEX5Z K5DAAT9M PJ89VZA6 R363KVTR BGN4QWC2 AXZJ7753 5V5HUCCX QZS7BYA3 JMV7WQAJ J2CXefR8GM 96VCL3DP XLB8DX5U S8Z9QFB2 28353CAH SS3CWKDH Y6M3AS4J TD3W6Y53 F2KV4NSF 7RF7KXJM TFTVJL4E D8U8ZNQ4 G7R2PN2F 8AGZSE3U LSH9PHBC W3G9ZTB9 2NYYSDFH RXZXKWE2 V8XLUR73 MKEZKMS2 JXAQKNH9 UYJHCM6K LACfefALP4K WVTY27efAP H99EfT7EM KHJUXUXJ NGUSRP3E efefef2JNY4NU4 XT54MRFR FYRBEAAX 9HT27JBZ WBU8WN2Y KNNSD96R N795UT79 8L5SPTKZ 5HP9UBCS ZAEMERUT L8GFFPZM HKZYNSF5 EYWN5J2W T4994NDT 2Q4ACFS2 WQ8VRQ64 3YYDKJEF L8GDSR5Z 85LNY9JR TTC4XEVEePH9HLfe7C3 TA7SEW4V 8L6DCEJB Y5KF2U3R 5G9LRVEU AFUG9S5Y 6GR2C2MR PP8SKFWX A2AB7FDT V7ZD239M 9YZ4SEZ7 3ULDSZ67 D5PHMR6N 6MTTH76F 7XNCZK2E QSTYCL5T 9VMMZUQT 6UHCRXEV YT2KEZ7Y 9LHXKBWE UQGJWDZW TGZ5UAK5 6WT4XfeATU JFDGfeZ33C 64Y92XDJ ePfCCF8KGT AFGVREPK E9AWNGLF UM75BGU8 CLC5BLY3 UCTCLGF6 QZNJCVYA EQEUW2PJ ZPK5A7G5 TWFK6XD9 N48WTELH RRJF5GA9 PU9MP6ZT 9LD7DBJ4 M5KA8V8U C6DZRZAB Z28PETPM 8L7MWRPR K5G2RX8J 6JNM8LNR WNFXAS2efT 6GYEKMS8 f8YRfeK8ffeeSFef3 N48XKJZfeR 3K9FJHES WKND97LN USXP7UKQ KX4UJFDQ P6X4JVNN RNZ6W6S5 8BPWCN2H PRFSKC5G DX523NTC ACYCVU6B QPX43QC6 RKFYYYYS AHYLS6TW PHRZC22L BKEGSSC3 2CKNF6KT WDE7UQ4Y WT2U4LVV PDS7P7KL NGfeMC9efeYZ fCF MfeEM2BG W9KeKWF5L TUHHRTTR WRBR3GCW 7KLXXCZG RV4F34J7 7RZUNWAY XYZ9HA9L EZ5GBJNV GHGEF6UA RW9LYEMQ 2FKJHYQY VFVGSMNR AJZZRVCP 9MJZ4664 RMT5WW2W 6458UHV2 Z9ENWRWE Q35JESYW BWVN2F2Q V7TR4HX6 GHSUTPMC 7e8MV38 P34WFLBK G4GfSUWQ6 X84NBA9K HS8E72AH YG2TNSF9 ASR6PM2G STZQGM7C ZEWJ2NHT VUZF699P D8XYUA6X C9VDFXZC WC7DGZNP 9E26LAYS BCSX6TEQ 7LSBQPJE TQP6KJ77 FG4M4AS9 N4UYC57S S63XEW3Z 9XZ7H344 9A2ULQ58 3BHX8JF8 8J3JLK7N XRP36NZZ KN4fefZ6B2M 4J4EDXZX 8DWG53Cefef6 MFCL7FRE P2KJXKMM RQANRRMB JKW762D3 AAWQJZHP NE6MH94G 8UMHJHVR 96V9HJCF JN4P4BRX H4PTEEQN 5QS4MP3N BRZNKSMH PCWFYKTQ 8H5TB9YP ZSC25NGA 4LS353UE X4WMGUBefV MP4QWZJ2 7MM4BVRH WBKRCERH G9DWUGFL 4ZVWMBMV BVRQB3L7 SXPYSCL5 U8BJEHVM 26EU74LS LL3G9H5J LGXJR9GQ E9ACVGX6 VVQQQBB9 642TX6FW A9NAQU7P YTRN2CWE NUZ3X65F KC9ZFUYX X4H4RJXN DXSAPD65 ZH47MXFR STL9R5BE 3LTPZ5Yef5 3Q9BXRLA TUC6KKSL FL5WZZL4 L65DC6UU 9C7ZRRJH WHUMKTBF VEVEFCYZ TQ9N7YWU 5P4STLUT MD6S5L9G 5JX3TX2S CE5JHWJT 8GTRM9GQ 2N76JKF9 PHNLJAY2 Q75LVAUS BLKZYCCH 87D24PCU 5GNHNLJZ 82C7L2TW YLZWN9F4 GNREWF4F VH9NMVF8 2P7KBQD5 9B8APTXE FJ8CGGY4 MN8R5VE8 BD7UZZEX EJRTJNXG QAGVSL6L HBKTF7JF 7JUE6UJG MW2LXA6T E8K9AEA8 APSTSK8X BVKWZVBE 4N2V6FM4 LQEBDKLX WY8GPNG8 UEY79FWE 5XSBBUPA P6QTLBH7 CN7BWK5L 86DJ882R UPAQZV69 4QDE2SQT NSKHH6SQ R47L7S8L FZQATUUK ARW2ZBYH NF8N8QXL W3EXVXV5 BMC2SC8A UXS7UNFZ
{{Other uses}}
] engaging in debate in ]'s painting ''A controversy from the Talmud'', 19th century.]]
'''Controversy''' is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting ] or point of view. The word was coined from the ] ''controversia'', as a composite of ''controversus'' – "turned in an opposite direction".
==Legal==
In the ], a controversy differs from a ]; while legal cases include all suits, ] as well as ], a controversy is a purely civil proceeding.

For example, the ] of ] (], Clause 1) states that "the judicial Power shall extend ... to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party". This clause has been deemed to impose a requirement that United States federal courts are not permitted to cases that do not pose an actual controversy—that is, an actual dispute between adverse parties which is capable of being resolved by the . In addition to setting out the scope of the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary, it also prohibits courts from issuing ]s, or from hearing cases that are either ], meaning that the controversy has not arisen yet, or ], meaning that the controversy has already been

==Benford's law==
{{Main|Gregory Benford#Benford's law of controversy|l1=Benford's law of controversy}}

], as expressed by the astrophysicist and science fiction author ] in 1980, states: ''] is ] to the amount of real ] available.''<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/Misc/EFF/?f=quotes.eff.txt |title=EFF Quotes Collection 19.6 |publisher=] |date=2001-04-09 |access-date=2016-12-04 |archive-date=2007-09-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070929083639/http://www.eff.org/Misc/EFF/?f=quotes.eff.txt |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080822143815/http://www.sysprog.net/quotlaws.html |archive-date=2008-08-22|url=http://www.sysprog.net/quotlaws.html|title=Quotations: Computer Laws |work=SysProg |access-date=2007-03-10}}</ref> In other words, it claims that the less factual information is available on a topic, the more controversy can arise around that topic – and the more facts are available, the less controversy can arise. Thus, for example, controversies in physics would be limited to subject areas where experiments cannot be carried out yet, whereas controversies would be inherent to politics, where communities must frequently decide on courses of action based on insufficient information.

==Psychological bases==
Controversies are frequently thought to be a result of a lack of confidence on the part of the disputants – as implied by ], which only talks about lack of information ("passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available"). For example, in analyses of the political controversy over ], which is exceptionally virulent in the ], it has been proposed that those who are opposed to the scientific consensus do so because they don't have enough information about the topic.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 9| issue = 3| pages = 297–312| last = Ungar| first = S.| s2cid = 7089937| title = Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the ozone hole| journal = Public Understanding of Science| year = 2000 | doi = 10.1088/0963-6625/9/3/306}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 1| issue = 1| pages = 35–41| last = Pidgeon| first = N.|author2=B. Fischhoff| s2cid = 85362091| title = The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks| journal = Nature Climate Change| year = 2011|bibcode = 2011NatCC...1...35P |doi = 10.1038/nclimate1080 }}</ref> A study of 1540 US adults<ref>{{Cite journal| last = Kahan| first = Dan M.|author2=Maggie Wittlin |author3=Ellen Peters |author4=Paul Slovic |author5=Lisa Larrimore Ouellette |author6=Donald Braman |author7=Gregory N. Mandel | title = The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Culture Conflict, Rationality Conflict, and Climate Change| year = 2011| doi = 10.2139/ssrn.1871503| ssrn = 1871503|hdl=1794/22097 | s2cid = 73649608|hdl-access=free }}</ref> found instead that levels of scientific literacy correlated with the strength of ], but not on which side of the debate that they stood.

The puzzling phenomenon of two individuals being able to reach different conclusions after being exposed to the same facts has been frequently explained (particularly by Daniel Kahneman) by reference to a ']' – in other words, that most judgments are made using fast acting ]s<ref>{{Cite journal| issn = 0002-8282| volume = 93| issue = 5| pages = 1449–1475| last = Kahneman| first = Daniel| title = Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics| journal = The American Economic Review| date = 2003-12-01| jstor = 3132137| doi = 10.1257/000282803322655392| url = http://www.econ.tuwien.ac.at/Lotto/papers/Kahneman2.pdf| citeseerx = 10.1.1.194.6554| access-date = 2017-10-24| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180219074537/http://www.econ.tuwien.ac.at/lotto/papers/Kahneman2.pdf| archive-date = 2018-02-19| url-status = dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 185| issue = 4157| pages = 1124–31| last = Tversky| first = A.| author2 = D. Kahneman| title = Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases| journal = Science| year = 1974| bibcode = 1974Sci...185.1124T| doi = 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124| pmid = 17835457| s2cid = 143452957| url = https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0767426| access-date = 2017-08-30| archive-date = 2018-06-01| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180601235707/http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/AD0767426| url-status = live}}</ref> that work well in every day situations, but are not amenable to decision-making about complex subjects such as climate change. ] has been particularly identified as relevant in climate change controversies <ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.03.004| issn = 0272-4944| volume = 30| issue = 4| pages = 358–367| last = Joireman| first = Jeff|author2=Heather Barnes Truelove |author3=Blythe Duell | title = Effect of outdoor temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global warming| journal = Journal of Environmental Psychology| date = December 2010}}</ref> as individuals are found to be more positively inclined to believe in climate change if the outside temperature is higher, if they have been primed to think about heat, and if they are primed with higher temperatures when thinking about the future temperature increases from climate change.

In other controversies – such as that around the ], the same evidence seemed to license inference to radically different conclusions.<ref>{{Cite news| issn = 0362-4331| last = Saul| first = Stephanie|author2=Andrew Pollack| title = Furor on Rush to Require Cervical Cancer Vaccine| work = The New York Times| access-date = 2011-11-26| date = 2007-02-17| url = https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/17/health/17vaccine.html}}</ref> Kahan et al.<ref>{{Cite journal| last = Kahan| first = Dan M.|author2=Donald Braman |author3=Geoffrey L. Cohen |author-link3=Geoffrey L. Cohen|author4=Paul Slovic |author5=John Gastil | title = Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn't, and Why? An Experimental Study of the Mechanisms of Cultural Cognition| date = 2008-07-15 |journal=Law and Human Behavior | ssrn = 1160654}}</ref> explained this by the cognitive biases of biased assimilation<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098| issn = 0022-3514| volume = 37| issue = 11| pages = 2098–2109| last = Lord| first = Charles G.|author2=Lee Ross |author3=Mark R. Lepper | title = Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence.| journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology| year = 1979| citeseerx = 10.1.1.372.1743}}</ref> and a credibility heuristic.<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1086/266350| volume = 15| issue = 4| pages = 635–650| last = HOVLAND| first = CARL I.|author2=WALTER WEISS| title = The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness| journal = Public Opinion Quarterly| date = 1951-12-21}}</ref>

Similar effects on reasoning are also seen in non-scientific controversies, for example in the ].<ref name="guncontrol">{{Cite journal| last = Braman| first = Donald|author2=James Grimmelmann |author3=Dan M. Kahan | title = Modeling Cultural Cognition |journal=Social Justice Research | date = 20 July 2007| ssrn = 1000449}}</ref> As with other controversies, it has been suggested that exposure to empirical facts would be sufficient to resolve the debate once and for all.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 151| issue = 4| pages = 1341–1348| last = Fremling| first = G.M.|author2=J.R. Lott Jr| title = Surprising Finding That Cultural Worldviews Don't Explain People's Views on Gun Control, The| journal = U. Pa. L. Rev.| year = 2002| doi = 10.2307/3312932| jstor = 3312932| url = https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3214&context=penn_law_review}}</ref><ref>{{Cite conference| publisher = National Bureau of Economic Research| last = Ayres| first = I.|author2=J.J. Donohue III| title = Shooting down the more guns, less crime hypothesis| year = 2002}}</ref> In computer simulations of cultural communities, beliefs were found to polarize within isolated sub-groups, based on the mistaken belief of the community's unhindered access to ground truth.<ref name="guncontrol" /> Such confidence in the group to find the ground truth is explicable through the success of ] based inferences.<ref>{{Cite journal| last = Lee| first = M.D. |author2=M. Steyvers |author3=M. de Young |author4=B.J. Miller | title = A Model-Based Approach to Measuring Expertise in Ranking Tasks}}</ref> However, if there is no access to the ground truth, as there was not in this model, the method will fail.

] allows these failures of rationality to be described as part of a statistically optimized system for decision making. Experiments and computational models in ] have shown that sensory input from different senses is integrated in a statistically optimal way,<ref>{{Cite journal| issn = 0028-0836| volume = 415| issue = 6870| pages = 429–433| last = Ernst| first = Marc O.|author2=Martin S. Banks| title = Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion| journal = Nature| date = 2002-01-24| doi = 10.1038/415429a|bibcode = 2002Natur.415..429E| pmid=11807554| s2cid = 47459}}</ref> in addition, it appears that the kind of inferences used to infer single sources for multiple sensory inputs uses a Bayesian inference about the causal origin of the sensory stimuli.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 8| issue = 3| pages = 24.1–11| last = Wozny| first = D.R. |author2=U.R. Beierholm |author3=L. Shams| title = Human trimodal perception follows optimal statistical inference| journal = Journal of Vision| year = 2008| doi = 10.1167/8.3.24| pmid = 18484830| doi-access = free}}</ref> As such, it appears neurobiologically plausible that the brain implements decision-making procedures that are close to optimal for Bayesian inference.

Brocas and Carrillo propose a model to make decisions based on noisy sensory inputs,<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1016/j.geb.2011.10.001| issn = 0899-8256| last = Brocas| first = Isabelle|author2=Juan D. Carrillo| title = From perception to action: An economic model of brain processes| journal = Games and Economic Behavior| volume=75| pages=81–103| year = 2012}}</ref> beliefs about the state of the world are modified by Bayesian updating, and then decisions are made based on beliefs passing a threshold. They show that this model, when optimized for single-step decision making, produces belief ] and polarization of opinions – exactly as described in the ] context – in spite of identical evidence presented, the pre-existing beliefs (or evidence presented first) has an overwhelming effect on the beliefs formed. In addition, the preferences of the agent (the particular rewards that they value) also cause the beliefs formed to change – this explains the biased assimilation (also known as ]) shown above. This model allows the production of controversy to be seen as a consequence of a decision maker optimized for single-step decision making, rather than a result of limited reasoning in the ] of ].

==See also==
{{Spoken Misplaced Pages|Controversy.ogg|date=2013-06-27}}
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
{{clear}}

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==External links==
{{Wikiquote}}
{{Wiktionary|controversy}}
* ], '''' (Sparsnäs, Sweden: Irene Publishing, 2014).
* based on ] on Misplaced Pages data
*

{{Authority control}}

]
]

Latest revision as of 08:47, 14 December 2024

State of prolonged public dispute or debate For other uses, see Controversy (disambiguation).
A scene of rabbis engaging in debate in Carl Schleicher's painting A controversy from the Talmud, 19th century.

Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. The word was coined from the Latin controversia, as a composite of controversus – "turned in an opposite direction".

Legal

In the theory of law, a controversy differs from a legal case; while legal cases include all suits, criminal as well as civil, a controversy is a purely civil proceeding.

For example, the Case or Controversy Clause of Article Three of the United States Constitution (Section 2, Clause 1) states that "the judicial Power shall extend ... to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party". This clause has been deemed to impose a requirement that United States federal courts are not permitted to cases that do not pose an actual controversy—that is, an actual dispute between adverse parties which is capable of being resolved by the . In addition to setting out the scope of the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary, it also prohibits courts from issuing advisory opinions, or from hearing cases that are either unripe, meaning that the controversy has not arisen yet, or moot, meaning that the controversy has already been

Benford's law

Main article: Benford's law of controversy

Benford's law of controversy, as expressed by the astrophysicist and science fiction author Gregory Benford in 1980, states: Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available. In other words, it claims that the less factual information is available on a topic, the more controversy can arise around that topic – and the more facts are available, the less controversy can arise. Thus, for example, controversies in physics would be limited to subject areas where experiments cannot be carried out yet, whereas controversies would be inherent to politics, where communities must frequently decide on courses of action based on insufficient information.

Psychological bases

Controversies are frequently thought to be a result of a lack of confidence on the part of the disputants – as implied by Benford's law of controversy, which only talks about lack of information ("passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available"). For example, in analyses of the political controversy over anthropogenic climate change, which is exceptionally virulent in the United States, it has been proposed that those who are opposed to the scientific consensus do so because they don't have enough information about the topic. A study of 1540 US adults found instead that levels of scientific literacy correlated with the strength of opinion on climate change, but not on which side of the debate that they stood.

The puzzling phenomenon of two individuals being able to reach different conclusions after being exposed to the same facts has been frequently explained (particularly by Daniel Kahneman) by reference to a 'bounded rationality' – in other words, that most judgments are made using fast acting heuristics that work well in every day situations, but are not amenable to decision-making about complex subjects such as climate change. Anchoring has been particularly identified as relevant in climate change controversies as individuals are found to be more positively inclined to believe in climate change if the outside temperature is higher, if they have been primed to think about heat, and if they are primed with higher temperatures when thinking about the future temperature increases from climate change.

In other controversies – such as that around the HPV vaccine, the same evidence seemed to license inference to radically different conclusions. Kahan et al. explained this by the cognitive biases of biased assimilation and a credibility heuristic.

Similar effects on reasoning are also seen in non-scientific controversies, for example in the gun control debate in the United States. As with other controversies, it has been suggested that exposure to empirical facts would be sufficient to resolve the debate once and for all. In computer simulations of cultural communities, beliefs were found to polarize within isolated sub-groups, based on the mistaken belief of the community's unhindered access to ground truth. Such confidence in the group to find the ground truth is explicable through the success of wisdom of the crowd based inferences. However, if there is no access to the ground truth, as there was not in this model, the method will fail.

Bayesian decision theory allows these failures of rationality to be described as part of a statistically optimized system for decision making. Experiments and computational models in multisensory integration have shown that sensory input from different senses is integrated in a statistically optimal way, in addition, it appears that the kind of inferences used to infer single sources for multiple sensory inputs uses a Bayesian inference about the causal origin of the sensory stimuli. As such, it appears neurobiologically plausible that the brain implements decision-making procedures that are close to optimal for Bayesian inference.

Brocas and Carrillo propose a model to make decisions based on noisy sensory inputs, beliefs about the state of the world are modified by Bayesian updating, and then decisions are made based on beliefs passing a threshold. They show that this model, when optimized for single-step decision making, produces belief anchoring and polarization of opinions – exactly as described in the global warming controversy context – in spite of identical evidence presented, the pre-existing beliefs (or evidence presented first) has an overwhelming effect on the beliefs formed. In addition, the preferences of the agent (the particular rewards that they value) also cause the beliefs formed to change – this explains the biased assimilation (also known as confirmation bias) shown above. This model allows the production of controversy to be seen as a consequence of a decision maker optimized for single-step decision making, rather than a result of limited reasoning in the bounded rationality of Daniel Kahneman.

See also

Listen to this article (8 minutes)
Spoken Misplaced Pages iconThis audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 27 June 2013 (2013-06-27), and does not reflect subsequent edits.(Audio help · More spoken articles)

References

  1. "EFF Quotes Collection 19.6". Electronic Frontier Foundation. 2001-04-09. Archived from the original on 2007-09-29. Retrieved 2016-12-04.
  2. "Quotations: Computer Laws". SysProg. Archived from the original on 2008-08-22. Retrieved 2007-03-10.
  3. Ungar, S. (2000). "Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the ozone hole". Public Understanding of Science. 9 (3): 297–312. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/9/3/306. S2CID 7089937.
  4. Pidgeon, N.; B. Fischhoff (2011). "The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks". Nature Climate Change. 1 (1): 35–41. Bibcode:2011NatCC...1...35P. doi:10.1038/nclimate1080. S2CID 85362091.
  5. Kahan, Dan M.; Maggie Wittlin; Ellen Peters; Paul Slovic; Lisa Larrimore Ouellette; Donald Braman; Gregory N. Mandel (2011). "The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Culture Conflict, Rationality Conflict, and Climate Change". doi:10.2139/ssrn.1871503. hdl:1794/22097. S2CID 73649608. SSRN 1871503. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  6. Kahneman, Daniel (2003-12-01). "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics" (PDF). The American Economic Review. 93 (5): 1449–1475. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.194.6554. doi:10.1257/000282803322655392. ISSN 0002-8282. JSTOR 3132137. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-02-19. Retrieved 2017-10-24.
  7. Tversky, A.; D. Kahneman (1974). "Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases". Science. 185 (4157): 1124–31. Bibcode:1974Sci...185.1124T. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124. PMID 17835457. S2CID 143452957. Archived from the original on 2018-06-01. Retrieved 2017-08-30.
  8. Joireman, Jeff; Heather Barnes Truelove; Blythe Duell (December 2010). "Effect of outdoor temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global warming". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 30 (4): 358–367. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.03.004. ISSN 0272-4944.
  9. Saul, Stephanie; Andrew Pollack (2007-02-17). "Furor on Rush to Require Cervical Cancer Vaccine". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  10. Kahan, Dan M.; Donald Braman; Geoffrey L. Cohen; Paul Slovic; John Gastil (2008-07-15). "Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn't, and Why? An Experimental Study of the Mechanisms of Cultural Cognition". Law and Human Behavior. SSRN 1160654.
  11. Lord, Charles G.; Lee Ross; Mark R. Lepper (1979). "Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 37 (11): 2098–2109. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.372.1743. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098. ISSN 0022-3514.
  12. HOVLAND, CARL I.; WALTER WEISS (1951-12-21). "The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness". Public Opinion Quarterly. 15 (4): 635–650. doi:10.1086/266350.
  13. ^ Braman, Donald; James Grimmelmann; Dan M. Kahan (20 July 2007). "Modeling Cultural Cognition". Social Justice Research. SSRN 1000449.
  14. Fremling, G.M.; J.R. Lott Jr (2002). "Surprising Finding That Cultural Worldviews Don't Explain People's Views on Gun Control, The". U. Pa. L. Rev. 151 (4): 1341–1348. doi:10.2307/3312932. JSTOR 3312932.
  15. Ayres, I.; J.J. Donohue III (2002). Shooting down the more guns, less crime hypothesis. National Bureau of Economic Research.
  16. Lee, M.D.; M. Steyvers; M. de Young; B.J. Miller. "A Model-Based Approach to Measuring Expertise in Ranking Tasks". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  17. Ernst, Marc O.; Martin S. Banks (2002-01-24). "Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion". Nature. 415 (6870): 429–433. Bibcode:2002Natur.415..429E. doi:10.1038/415429a. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 11807554. S2CID 47459.
  18. Wozny, D.R.; U.R. Beierholm; L. Shams (2008). "Human trimodal perception follows optimal statistical inference". Journal of Vision. 8 (3): 24.1–11. doi:10.1167/8.3.24. PMID 18484830.
  19. Brocas, Isabelle; Juan D. Carrillo (2012). "From perception to action: An economic model of brain processes". Games and Economic Behavior. 75: 81–103. doi:10.1016/j.geb.2011.10.001. ISSN 0899-8256.

External links

Categories: