Cognitive Dissonance

[Libre]

This is a remarkably interesting topic and accounts for all sorts of otherwise inexplicable human behavior. It even accounts for certain animal behavior, in cognitive animals like monkeys.
It accounts for a great deal of our attitudes that, when you stop to really think about them, you can't (or won't) understand where these attitudes come from or why they persist.
I invite anyone to read either or both of the following articles and then come back and discuss.
I've been thinking about this topic since I was introduced to it in a psych class in college, in the early 1970's. That's a long time to be thinking about a rather abstract concept - long enough to have become absolutely convinced of it's veracity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html

If you want to participate in this discussion, think of a closely held belief, and examine why you hold that belief. Discover, if you will, if it is a result of cognitive dissonance. I have an example from my own life to offer, if we get into this.

You will reveal a great deal about yourself, to yourself, if you are open to exploring this incredibly powerful psychological force, and how it has affected your attitudes.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I have personally experienced a very intense cognitive dissonance many times in my life. I also see it in other threads in this site and in people on the street.

The first time I had a big dissonance was when I was dealing with my mother's progressing stages of Alzheimer's Disease. I turned to the Bible for comfort, for help, for understanding - and found that it was a house of cards. When I read the Bible critically, it made no sense in light of modern findings. It offered no hope that made any sense because there was no evidence to support that hope. However, I had been brought up in a Christian family and suddenly at that time had to face things that just could not be true - even though they were presented to me as such by people I trusted a lot.

I resolved parts of that dissonance by becoming atheist but by realizing that the Bible still had a couple of good ideas here and there - most notably, the merits and benefits of forgiveness. Once I forgave my parents for unknowingly imposing the lies of modern organized religion, I could split that dissonance out and think for myself. I didn't need a preacher to tell me what to think.

Of course, the "Are you an Atheist" thread explores that idea more fully. In it, you can see where people confronted with evidence that the Bible is just a book of primitive stores simply cannot accept the implications. From the Wikipedia article, this is the example of categorically rejecting that which you don't want to hear because you can't face the alternative implied by the new idea.

The article also discusses "potential" levels for the conflict, where the strength of the two opposing beliefs contributes to the final resolution. For children brought up in a very strict religious family, the potential of the learned behavior is so high that it takes a near catastrophe to counter those beliefs successfully. (For example, my own event involved the long, slow, agonizing death of a family member. Pretty serious in terms of the potential strength of the event, I would say.)

I also had the dissonance of having the really bitter duty of having to be my mother's primary caregiver and, eventually, supervisor of her care. My emotional context was so badly torn up that I ended up alienating several women to whom I might have otherwise been able to form a serious relationship. Only after my mother's death was I able to rejoin general society and form relationships again. My dear and loving wife of 20+ years helped me to live again once the dissonances were resolved.

With Mom, I was caught in between the proverbial "rock and hard place." If I left Mom to rot in a nursing home, unattended and unvisited, she would have died it greater misery than she actually did, because nursing home residents who have no visitors tend to be neglected. Bed sores and isolation are not pretty sights.

The emotional toll of keeping up those visits took 5 years off of my own life during which I had minimal outside support. Dad was gone already. Mom's nearest family members other than me were 300+ miles away and were all busy caring for their own elderly parents. If one can call a conscience that part of us that provides one side of the dissonance, for example between tending to or ignoring ailing family members, then I had a massive case of conscience in that situation. So I gave up dating, passed up a near-perfect job offer, and lived in total misery for those years that Mom needed me. But at least when it was over, I could look at myself in a mirror and not hate what I saw.

 

[Libre]

Thank you, Doc Man for your reply.
You know, we (you and I) seem to have a lot in common.
First of all, I find your posts to be fair and sensible - at least the ones I've read. I find that I can agree with much that you write.
Second of all, I was also the primary care giver, Power of Attorney, health care proxy, etc, for my Alzheimer's riddled mother, wasting away in a nursing home. That took about 4 years of serenity and happiness out of my own life.
Last of all, I am also a "Doc Man". I'm the Engineering documentation coordinator at a manufacturing company. So we seem to have a lot in common.

I also notice the Cognitive Dissonance (CD) in the atheism thread, and many other threads - maybe even all of them - at least the non-technical ones. And not only on the part of the "bible thumpers" (excuse me, Bladerunner) but on the part of the atheists as well. ("What - I should waste 2 hours of my life watching a video about a mythological being?"). That's CD talking. That's saying, "I don't have the interest to go watch the video, and besides my mind is already made up."
(as an aside, I did NOT watch the video myself - because I don't have the time and my mind is made up).

Anytime you see or hear someone arguing a point vehemently - it's likely there is at least *some* CD working there. I think it's nearly impossible for a socialized adult human to escape it. It's part of how we function.

Yet, it remains a rather arcane topic, of little apparent interest to the world at large - like it's a kind of a niche topic of interest only to headshrinkers and maybe marketing executives. WRONG! It is an intensely powerful force that influences so many of our attitudes.

My own example would be the following - this is made up but it symbolizes very similar conflicts I've experienced many times:
Suppose you bought a very expensive car (for example, a BMW). Let's say you had 1 week to return it for your money back. In that week you might notice the flaws - and finding them, think they were worse than they were. After the week, if you kept the car you would decide those flaws weren't really very important. Then you see an article in a magazine about a "knock-off" car (say, a KIA). The article says the KIA is equal to the BMW, in fact superior in many respects. To top it off, the KIA is $20,000 less than the BMW. The normal reaction would be - ahhh, this magazine is no good, I've read this author before and he's full of crap, etc. Different reaction than if you were within the week. Then the article might push you over the line to return it.

Our attitudes, likes and dislikes, political positions, etc - they are all influenced by CD no matter who you are or what your positions are. It affects all of us - this is my opinion. Understanding this dynamic psychological force helps me understand myself.

 

[spikepl]

Interesting stuff -especially when you encounter it within yourself but also others. In fact easier to spot it on others: I'm watching, daily, a near-suicidal behaviour (businesswise only, fortunately - this concerns increasing sales on a website that did well once upon a time, but no longer) of people stuck in their perceptions and entirely unable to break it, while consistently spouting all the right slogans and views of themselves and the world.

This touches upon another phenomenon which is also pretty prevalent: The Dunning-Kruger Effect. See eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

 

[Steve R.]

Though I am now retired, my government work experience in environmental/urban planning and permitting creates cognitive dissonance with Libertarian principles. The cognitive dissonance arises from supporting individual freedom, yet using the power of the State to limit unrestrained individual freedom. This dissonance can be rationalized through a variety of adaptive thought process.

The world is now highly interconnected. Activities in one area can have a variety of adverse consequences in other areas. For example, dumping pollutants into a river affects the water quality downstream and could contaminate downstream drinking water thereby making that resource unavailable to downstream users. Historically that was not much on an issue since Nature provided the clean-up. Now it is an issue since Nature is overloaded due to growing population and industrialization. Companies and individuals, are reluctant (even in some cases to the point of obstruction) in having to absorb those external costs of clean-up, yet they do not have a right to pollute another persons water. In this type of situation, the State has a legitimate role in preventing pollution by forcing people to clean-up their polluted water before discharge so that the downstream user has potable water.

The planning process from the very beginning involves developing a working relationship with the applicant for a development permit. A great deal of the cognitive dissonance can be dissipated through the permit negotiation process so that both sides come-out satisfied. For example, redesigning a proposed shopping center to avoid impacting sensitive habitat.

Libertarianism and the State can coexist. Libertarianism needs to recognize that unrestrained individual freedom (in certain circumstances) can be detrimental to others and the environment. The State needs to recognize that it needs to limit its power over individuals and companies.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Spike - LOVE that Dunning/Kruger article. It makes me think of something called the Peter Principle, which says that people in an employment hierarchy rise to their level of incompetence. The Dilbert comic strip gives frequent examples of this exact situation.

One could argue that Dunning/Kruger is a form of CD in which a person cannot admit their lack of ability because of the mental distress implied by such admission. The article left out a Biblical admonition regarding a Dunning/Kruger situation - the passage about removing the beam from one's own eye before removing the mote from another person's eye.

Good catch, Spike!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Libre

I'm the Engineering documentation coordinator at a manufacturing company.

In my day job, I write technical software documentation. At night, I write fantasy fiction. No real activity changes between night and day, so no retraining involved.

Except I have to remember to not skewer someone's guts with a broadsword in my software documentation, tempting though it might be.

 

[Libre]

Libre

Except I have to remember to not skewer someone's guts with a broadsword in my software documentation, tempting though it might be.

Or try to explain software configuration management to a three headed, fire-breathing dragon!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Well, actually the only dragon I've used was one-headed but it was a momma dragon and my heroes helped the little whelps so the fire-breathing was strictly limited. After all, dragons ARE more intelligent than many managers I have met. Now if they could only do something about their breath...

 

[James Deckert]

there was no evidence to support that hope.

Josh McDowell wrote a great book called "Evidence that demands a Verdict." It delves into archaeology, textual studies, etc. It is not light reading and is very scholarly. There are several other books which are written for a more casual reader. It's easy to criticize the Bible, but after doing research attempting to disprove the Bible, the Atheist Josh McDowell became a Christian.

Having said that, I respect you for taking care of your family. A trait which is honorable.

 

[Libre]

Interesting stuff -especially when you encounter it within yourself but also others. In fact easier to spot it on others: I'm watching, daily, a near-suicidal behaviour (businesswise only, fortunately - this concerns increasing sales on a website that did well once upon a time, but no longer) of people stuck in their perceptions and entirely unable to break it, while consistently spouting all the right slogans and views of themselves and the world.

This touches upon another phenomenon which is also pretty prevalent: The Dunning-Kruger Effect. See eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Human behavior and thought are such fascinating topics.
I read the article on the Dunning Kruger Effect.
I have seen this effect many times in my own experience.
As stated by someone in the thread above, it is closely related to the Peter Principle.
There are the Elon Musks and Dean Kamens of the world. Visionary entrepreneurs who have huge impacts on the world - but who typically have to start their own companies to get anywhere.
What is the name of the guy who invented the transistor?
Duh - I don't know that one myself but it was some dude or dudes working at Bell labs, I believe. Nobody knows his name without a Google search.
I've been an employee in corporations for almost 4 decades. The people with the power, the status, the prestige, the money - THEY are almost NEVER the really smart, really capable, really creative folks. The smart, creative folks work quietly, inventing ingenious and amazing solutions. Then the bosses (who don't really understand what that super-smart and inventive fellow has done) find ways to castrate the solution so it's just a shadow of what it might have been, and congratulate themselves on how smart THEY are to have "found" this solution. Meanwhile they get the raises and bonuses while the real brains just keep plugging away, and at their relatively meager salaries.
Then there are the lower level worker bees that believe they are the true backbone of the company.
That's how it goes, folks.
Which group would you rather belong to?
The overpaid and overrated gluttons of the corporation, the underpaid brains, or the barely cognizant drones?
If I told you which group I associate with, you might accuse me of being a victim of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

What is the name of the guy who invented the transistor?

Didn't need to look it up. William F Shockley, with John Bardeen as one of his assistants. Now, without looking it up, why does John Bardeen stand out among the many great physicists? (Hint: Superconductivity).

Mr. Deckert, even if you could prove the Bible's historical claims, you cannot EVER prove the mystical ones. The Bible itself clearly claims that God's kingdom is not of this world. There is nothing provable in any of the mysticism.

I cannot speak to why Mr. McDowell made any of his choices and have not heard of that book. However, it is inherent in the nature of the Bible that it CANNOT be proved. A scholarly work won't do the trick. We get our noses rubbed in the idea that only through faith can we come to God or Jesus, and that concept is directly found in the Bible. If I cannot trust that statement in the Bible, why should I trust it for anything else? Pure logic dictates that Mr. McDowell's work, based on research conducted in this world, found nothing not of this world that could be verified, because that would mean that the Bible lied with its "not of this world" claims. Is it Cognitive Dissonance to insist that people making claims on the veracity of the Bible follow the principles stated in the Bible? Recall that I was once a Christian (specifically, Methodist). I am NOT unfamiliar with what is in the Bible.

After my difficult experience, I saw the Bible and modern organized religion as being very much akin to one of the fraudulent investment schemes.

* You have to invest something (in this case, your time and mental energy, but cash donations ARE accepted) in something that can only possibly show "true" benefits after you are dead. Which means that if it was a scan, it is too late for you to know that it was a scam at the time that the investment is supposed to pay off. I.e. it becomes an uncollectable debt.

* When you ask to see something about the details of the fund, the document you get is huge and contains information that, at best, is tenuously related to the goal of the investment. Further, ALL of the testimonials are anecdotal rather than testable. Many of the chapters/sections are even acknowledged to be of questionable origin. (Remember, some religions accept the Apocrypha, some don't.)

* If you attempt to withdraw from participation in the scheme, the managers thereof tell you that you lose everything you've invested if you take that early withdrawal. They chide you for your lack of patience and try to shame you because of your desire to ask questions and know more about what you are getting for your investment.

* If you ask for hard proof of the value of your investments, you are told that you have to have faith in the investment's main manager and that he can't waste his time providing proof of value to every individual investor. He's got too many other important things to do.

I try to be open-minded, but the parallels are just too close. Let's just say that I'm a practical man. This has all the earmarks of a fraudulent investment scheme. And you know what people say... If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it surely isn't an eagle.

 

[Libre]

Some people require proof to believe in something.
Some people just need to believe.
I don't believe in pretty much anything.
I'm even more skeptical than an atheist.
I'm a solipsist.
Nothing outside of my own mind can be proven to me to exit.

If this seems absurd, then think of a vivid dream you had.
It was in your mind. You thought it was real. But it was only your mind.
How can you prove that you're not dreaming this right now?
You can't, so you shouldn't believe it is happening because there is no proof.

Solipsism is the only truth that there is or can be.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Descartes would like a word with you.

 

[Libre]

Descartes would like a word with you.

Descartes is the Muhammad of Solipsism. I would love to have a word with him, if only he existed.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Actually, "I think, therefore I am" comes from a proof he did in order to show that the world really is as we generally perceive it. It's part of a larger treatise that was an attempt at proving the existence of God.

Most people only know that one line, though, and think it's about solipsism.

 

[Libre]

Froth
You made the connection between Descartes and solipsism - a connection I intentionally avoided until you brought him up.

By the way:
Descartes walks into a bar and orders a martini.
Bartender says, "ya want an olive in that?"
Descartes says "I think not" and then disappears.

 

[Rx_]

Not understanding the Tragedy of the Commons?
The religion (or belief) that central government is the only way to salvation might just be the easy way out of taking personal responsibility. Of course, getting paid to promote the belief is an old idea. Never heard of a priest receiving retirement pay doubt the faith.