Neutrality is all about not taking sides. Whether it is about the tastiness of pineapple pizza or the justifiability of the holocaust (do I need to explain why it is unjustified?), you don’t take sides regardless of the facts each side provides.
Objectivity is all about siding with facts. Whether you believe it or not, there is always chance that one party is more wrong than the other; it is hard to find a conflict in which both sides are equally wrong.
If both sides get many of their facts wrong and one is more guilty of it, you should frame it as wrong vs more wrong. If one gets most of its facts right and the other gets most of them wrong, frame it as mostly right vs mostly wrong.
Objectivity is all about siding with facts. If you get most of your facts wrong, you deserve objectivity’s middle finger.
Oh, and I believe objectivity can be used to determine our moral integrity, at least in the realm of bigotry.
A bigot reduces a particular group of human beings to mere stereotypes, which are over-simplified and preconceived beliefs desperately seeking validation. Basically, a bigot gets most (all) of their facts wrong.
Let’s face it: they get their so-called facts from hearsay, their feelings, other people’s feelings, media representations, studies with questionable samplings and methods, studies which results cannot be duplicated and, of course, hostile interactions which the bigots instigate. Here is a surprising fact: those are not great sources of reliable information about the “others”.
You don’t need to be a genius to intellectually defeat a bigot. As long as we cherish facts and we aren’t deranged animals with extremely insatiable lust for neutrality, everyone can do it.
But then, we are talking about humans after all. If the BBC cannot be factual regarding trans issues, it is naive to expect anything better from the average cretins.
Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.