The Most Important Discovery of Modern Psychology

This video is part of a larger introductory course on cognitive biases and critical thinking. The course has over 40 lectures and over 2.5 hours of video content.
The course is available on Udemy. Click the link below to go directly to the course with a 50% discount off the retail price:
kevindelaplante.com/Ugrade-You...
The course is also available at the Critical Thinker Academy, where you can find 20 hours of video tutorials on various topics related to logic, argumentation and critical thinking:
kevindelaplante.com/ctacademy
Follow the Critical Thinker Academy on Facebook:
/ criticalthinkeracademy
Follow me on Twitter:
/ kevindelaplante

[@emiel89]

Kevin the links in your video do not work.

[@K0ndratyuk]

It seems to me that if we have "No" conscious access to X, it would be an unknown unknown. Here we seem to have a known unknown, such as we know we are going to die, but we don't normally have conscious access to the particulars. Presenting evidence of the weaker claim doesn't seem to provide support for the different, broader, and more restrictive assertion. Acknowledgement that "when we're prepared for it", we can "override" bias would seem to support the claim that "we can detect unconscious bias" by active searching. In the same way we can detect most probable characteristics of submerged iceberg mass, most likely scenarios and timing for our own lifespan and its ending, I would assert that it seems likely that we should be able to detect bias in the accessible evidence of our beliefs and reasoning: our language. Absolutist terms are a red flag for me; When I use "all", "always", "never", "bottom-line", "X is all about Y", etc., my rule is to examine my reasoning. Following such rules enough make them unconscious habits, consciously chosen.

[@emiel89]

These absolutist terms are used a lot when drawing conclusions from empirical data. So why are these red flags to you?