Mason Chap 1/2

I wonder, as an analytic philosopher, if there is any way that one may examine a position without inducing bias. Mason mentions that many people believe a position may only be criticized from within its field (such as a work of art may only be criticized by another artist). Surely a non-artist would not have the perspective and experiental knowledge that the artist would, but the artist herself would have biases from her own work and area of specialization. For example, an artist may be inclined toward paintings and would so greatest informed and experienced with paintings, but would be biased towards (or against) works that resemble her own, or against works from another sub-discipline (such as classical sculptures).

However, the real question is: does this even matter? According to Lynch it would, but would not for Elgin. I am interested to see where Mason stands!