Bias, The Most Severe Type Of Assumption

Along with the fact that logic cannot be false without still being true (this is the case with a handful of specific, separate logical axioms) and that their own consciousness exists and grasps these truths, the fact that making assumptions is always irrational and unwarranted, since this one way or another involves belief for a reason other than genuine proof, is one of the very first things a new rationalist would realize.  Everyone who is not a rationalist makes some kind of assumption, as they necessarily do not know that/why reason is true in itself—and it is impossible to consciously exist and think without believing something.  Even someone who thinks they have no beliefs would have to believe this by regarding it as correct.  But not all types of assumptions, separate from the ideas themselves, are equally irrational.

Bias is more severe than a casual assumption: a persistently biased person would hold to their assumption or worldview even if someone else points out that it by logical necessity must be false or when evidence mounts that it is not true (of course, there is no excuse for conflating logic and evidence or for waiting for others to point out strictly logical facts, since they are true by necessity and thus immediately knowable and accessible).  In other words, being biased entails more than simply making an assumption.  Having a bias means making an assumption or acting as if something is true just because one wants to do so or sincerely believes a given thing basically no matter what.

Someone making an assumption with a lesser degree of commitment is irrational, including the person who assumes something without any emotionalistic passion, but at least they are not necessarily holding to it with such stubbornness or ferocity that they would not relinquish the belief for any reason.  Making any assumption is stupid, no matter the issue.  Still, embracing or maintaining a bias is an even more egregious form of irrationality than casually assuming the very same thing.

When certain people admit they are biased with laughter or fierceness, they are only compounding their stupidity.  Treating their philosophical delusions as comedic does not make them so, and no amount of sincerity or conviction will ever legitimize making an assumption about the slightest matter—even if the thing assumed is both true and demonstrable.  The problem is that, regardless of whether an idea is correct or verifiable, the concept is believed on the basis of something, whatever it is, besides sheer logical necessity and the absolute certainty it alone allows for.  There are no exceptions.

The rectification of bias or any kind of assumption can only be done by letting go of any unproven [1] or unprovable idea, recognizing that necessary truths start with logical axioms, and intentionally forgoing any assumption in favor of rationalistic confirmation.  This process of philosophical rectification might be very painful, so it is easier in a sense for a non-rationalist to remain in the total ignorance of believing a worldview based on assumptions (though the ideas assumed might be true), familiarity, and their own persuasion in the moment.  There is still never a justification for remaining unaware of logical axioms and in the grip of assumptions, which is always entirely voluntary and avoidable.

[1].  This means that the individual has not properly looked to reason to discover the proof, not that no one else has realized why the idea is logically true or that relevant logical facts are not already objectively true.