Ontological Bias: Difference between revisions
An Avatar.Global Resource
Created page with "{{navmenu}} <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> <blockquote class="definition">'''Ontological Bias''' is </blockquote> ==Concept Map== ===Key Concepts=== Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System > {{#ask:Is a key term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System|format=ul|sort=Has sort AG}} Spiritual Theory > {{#ask:Is a keyword::Spiritual Theory|format=ul}} ===Syncretic Terms=== Ontological Bias > {{#ask:Is a syncretic term::Ontological Bias|format..." |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{navmenu}} | {{navmenu}} | ||
<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> | <h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1> | ||
<blockquote class="definition">'''Ontological Bias''' is | <blockquote class="definition">An '''Ontological Bias''' is a bias that emerges from rigid adherence to a particular view of the fundamental nature of reality — a theological or philosophical worldview — such that the adherent's mind is closed to alternative explanations, and to the logic and evidence that might support alternative views. </blockquote> | ||
==Concept Map== | ==Concept Map== | ||
| Line 24: | Line 23: | ||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||
In the [[Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion]], ontological bias is defined as "bias that emerges from rigid adherence to certain theological and philosophical worldviews. Ontological bias closes our mind to alternative explanations and the logic and evidence that might support alternative views." Examples: a person who sees God as a white male patriarch will have a hard time listening to a Hindu who brings forward a more pantheistic vision of Consciousness; an atheist will dismiss out of hand evidence for spiritual realities and accounts of spiritual experience; a Catholic will see only the positive aspects of their religion and justify uncomfortable aspects (pervasive paedophilia in the church, for example); a Marxist will see only an opiate; a sociologist will see only the ecclesiastical component of religion and ignore religious experience. Because of these blinders, "neither group is capable of grasping the big picture." | |||
The term is used in a closely related sense by Jana Bacevic (2017) and Mark Carrigan (2017), for whom ontological bias is essentially "epistemic attachment to the object of research" — the way a scholar's investment in a particular object of knowledge (see [[Epistemic Attachment]]) constrains what can be thought, predicted, or imagined about that object. In the LP framework, the two senses converge: ontological bias is what happens when attachment hardens into worldview, and worldview then filters evidence, experience, and imagination alike. | |||
Ontological bias rarely travels alone. In the academic study of religion it is compounded by ethnocentrism, Eurocentrism, and flat-out racist attempts to dismiss anything that does not originate in white, European thought — producing the [[Boundary Fetish]]. Ontological bias is also the last line of defense when substantive and functional definitions of religion fail to separate science from religion: having failed to draw boundaries on content or function, scholars retreat to ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority) — boundaries that also collapse under sustained empirical attention, since scientists themselves report mystical and enlightenment experiences, transpersonal psychology crosses the materialist line, and scientific institutions display the same conservatism and heretic-excommunication dynamics as churches (cf. Rupert Sheldrake's excommunication by Nature editor John Maddox). | |||
{{endstuff}} | {{endstuff}} | ||
Revision as of 12:44, 11 September 2026
Ontological Bias
An Ontological Bias is a bias that emerges from rigid adherence to a particular view of the fundamental nature of reality — a theological or philosophical worldview — such that the adherent's mind is closed to alternative explanations, and to the logic and evidence that might support alternative views.
Concept Map
Key Concepts
Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System >
Syncretic Terms
Related LP Terms
Non-LP Related Terms
Notes
In the Rocket Scientists' Guide to Religion, ontological bias is defined as "bias that emerges from rigid adherence to certain theological and philosophical worldviews. Ontological bias closes our mind to alternative explanations and the logic and evidence that might support alternative views." Examples: a person who sees God as a white male patriarch will have a hard time listening to a Hindu who brings forward a more pantheistic vision of Consciousness; an atheist will dismiss out of hand evidence for spiritual realities and accounts of spiritual experience; a Catholic will see only the positive aspects of their religion and justify uncomfortable aspects (pervasive paedophilia in the church, for example); a Marxist will see only an opiate; a sociologist will see only the ecclesiastical component of religion and ignore religious experience. Because of these blinders, "neither group is capable of grasping the big picture."
The term is used in a closely related sense by Jana Bacevic (2017) and Mark Carrigan (2017), for whom ontological bias is essentially "epistemic attachment to the object of research" — the way a scholar's investment in a particular object of knowledge (see Epistemic Attachment) constrains what can be thought, predicted, or imagined about that object. In the LP framework, the two senses converge: ontological bias is what happens when attachment hardens into worldview, and worldview then filters evidence, experience, and imagination alike.
Ontological bias rarely travels alone. In the academic study of religion it is compounded by ethnocentrism, Eurocentrism, and flat-out racist attempts to dismiss anything that does not originate in white, European thought — producing the Boundary Fetish. Ontological bias is also the last line of defense when substantive and functional definitions of religion fail to separate science from religion: having failed to draw boundaries on content or function, scholars retreat to ontology (materialism vs. idealism) and epistemology (empirical method vs. authority) — boundaries that also collapse under sustained empirical attention, since scientists themselves report mystical and enlightenment experiences, transpersonal psychology crosses the materialist line, and scientific institutions display the same conservatism and heretic-excommunication dynamics as churches (cf. Rupert Sheldrake's excommunication by Nature editor John Maddox).
Citation and Legal
The SpiritWiki is a freely available, open-access Knowledge System devoted to health, healing, and reconnection. You may freely use information in the SpiritWiki; citation and attribution are welcomed, but not required. You can help this knowledge system grow by joining its Patreon.
The SpiritWiki is marked CC0 1.0 Universal and in the public domain, free for everyone on the planet to use. Please support its growth.
Footnotes