A cognitive bias that consists of overvaluing form (logic, structure, method, procedure) at the expense of content (substance, context, meaning). Those who suffer from this bias believe that an argument is good simply because it follows formal rules (syllogisms, statistics, protocols), regardless of its adequacy to
reality or its consequences. Formality bias is the basis of empty formalism: people who
use technical jargon, complicated diagrams, or impressive equations to give the appearance of rigor to
weak arguments. It is very common in certain pockets of strongly restricted analytical
philosophy (where logical structure is valued more than intuition), in bureaucracies (where following procedure is more important than solving the problem), and in
internet debates (where posting a link to a study is valued more than interpreting the study). The
irony: excessive formality can generate absurd conclusions because it ignores the contingent and social nature of knowledge.
Formality Bias Example: “The debater presented a formally
valid argument in propositional
logic. But the premises were false. When alerted, he replied: ‘The form is correct, that’s what matters. You can discuss the content later.’
Pure Formality Bias.”
