It seems a couple of those Dr. Burton discusses, who are sure of their own competence even as they demonstrate their lack, are represented among the commenters here.

Where does Dr. Burton display a particular political preference? He points out that both Democrats and Republicans are prey to the same emotional certainty--flying in the face of facts which should give them pause--and does not specify who he thinks does better at objective evaluation of facts and making logical conclusions based on those facts.

Dr. Burton also does not display "personal certainty" of his "beliefs" here, but discusses the results of studies in cognitive science and what those studies suggest.

As to whether cognitive (or any other kind of) scientists are aware of their own inherent biases, I would say they're probably MORE aware of their own biases than the average person. As another commenter pointed out, once you have to test your own hypotheses, you quickly get a rough acquaintance with the errors in your own thinking.

Some years back I began receiving emails from my father and his email circle, promulgating denigrating information about a particular political party and its candidates. These emails were unsourced and exaggerated email rumors of the type that we all receive. However, my father and his friends were passing them around with approving comments of their own. I began to reply to them with contrary information, information that sometimes explicitly revealed that the "facts" they were passing around were in fact fiction, slanders and rumor. I did not do this in the expectation that I would change their political preferences, but only to try to point out that they were passing along and believing information that was easily checked and mostly wrong. I thought they would be more likely to be more skeptical about such dubious emails in the future.

It didn't work; they either ignored my contrary information altogether or replied witn non-substantive and insulting remarks about my own "patriotism." Mind, I did not involve myself in arguing against their political convictions, but only in pointing out that many of the "facts" they were circulating were easily checked and found wanting. They continued to circulate the unsourced and dubious emails, as they obviously served to ratify their own emotional certainties, as did the acceptance of the tainted information by each other member in the group. Rather than preferring to solidify confidence in their convictions by objective evaluation of available information, they preferred to find such affirmation in the echo chamber of their own group mind.

No one suggests there is any unbiased human, a logic machine, a Mr. Spock who can always ignore his emotions and biases and act strictly on "the facts," (which are always subject to reevaluation as new facts are uncovered.) The important thing is that we each be aware of the limits of our own knowledge and competence, that we each be aware of our own biases, so we may check ourselves. When we hear something, for example, about one of the candidates we support or abhor that feeds our emotional beliefs about the candidate, rather than simply accept what we hear and pass it on to others, we should be aware we're indulging our biases and instead step back and wait for the evidence, wait for competing information to be produced, consider all the known, provable information that can be collected and make a consideration based on this information. It's imperfect and uncertain, but it's the only way to arrive at what we call "informed" decisions.

I saw SYNECHDOCHE yesterday and I loved it. It was funny and sad and bitter and regretful and ultimately quite moving. I actually had a weird notion this morning as I was thinking about the movie...that the protagonist, Caden Cotard, is not actually a real character at all, and his story not real, but that he and his apparent life are the creation/projection of another character in the story, one who is not obviously a major character at all. I won't be specific, in order that others reading here and who intend to see the movie but who haven't yet may draw their own conclusions.

I think this is obviously one of the best films of the year.