Not a rational world – When facts contradict opinions
We make decisions such as supporting certain policies, campaigns or individuals. If later these are demonstrated as dishonest, naive or just plain wrong you would expect us to change our minds and perhaps take a contrary position. In fact a rather strange phenomenon often appears.
Being confronted with evidence that contradicts our earlier belief often we may become entrenched in the original mind set. This is particularly the case if we had been very public in our pronouncements. I include myself in this. Basically it can be very hurtful to our self image and to the view others take of us when we admit that we were perhaps wrong or misjudged a situation. We can be quite irrational in admitting that facts contradict opinions.
The events above are well described for instance in science by Thomas Kuhn in his book ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’. He talks of communities holding on to paradigms in the face of ever increasing counter arguments. So strong can this be that individuals and groups can be effectively ‘expelled’ from the community by not supporting certain dogmas. We see this of course in religion and in politics as well. This is not to say that individuals, groups or communities do not change their stance given strong enough evidence. It does happen from time to time but this is not an automatic process. The Kuhn argument is part of what is called the Pragmatist philosophical tradition and has been increasingly influential over the years. What is being said is that much assessment of evidence or debate can be irrational. Again I stress that the stronger and more public the original beliefs are, the less most of us are willing to accept contrary evidence.
J. M. Keynes put it well when he said:
‘The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones.’
He also said:
‘There is no harm in being sometimes wrong – especially if one is promptly found out.’
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_maynard_keynes.html
We are going through a time of great worry and economic uncertainty which opens the door to populist movements and existing or new religious certainties. These have differences but one common feature is that the adherents to such movements often form an extreme loyalty. Usually a central figure is promoted to cult status. The leader can do little wrong. Great faith is put in certain individuals and personal critical faculties are sublimated to the wider cause. Other historical epochs have had such events sometimes with disastrous consequences.
Getting back to my main point, the downgrading of evidence when it weakens the faith in orthodoxy is harmful to individuals and those affected by them. Group splits, schisms and the rest of it will appear especially when failure happens. Some individuals originally attracted but perhaps more questioning will peel off but others will either reattach themselves even more firmly to their loyalties or seek new certainties.. For those outside these movements great challenges are presented.
Of course group psychology has been a hot field of study over the years and here are two example definitions that may contribute to the current discussion.
*Deindividuation is a concept in social psychology that is generally thought of as the losing of self-awareness in groups. Theories of de-individuation propose that it is a psychological state of decreased self-evaluation and decreased evaluation apprehension that causes abnormal collective behaviour.
*Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an incorrect or deviant decision-making outcome.
It is a huge temptation for those outside the community to belittle those inside. If anything this can be counter productive and lead to an almost ‘cultural’ divide between opponents. Certainly linguistic differences may be so great that communication between proponents and opponents may see a breakdown of any proper dialogue. There are ways out of this though. Firstly presenting alternative viewpoints and actions in a friendly and inclusive way possibly in a neutral context will work with some. Being open about ones doubts on our own views is both beneficial to ourselves and for some seen as a way of reopening reasoned argument. Secondly providing arguments and actions that open up common ground again will be effective for some (not all). Self examination of beliefs should be a common feature of any active mind. It puts our beliefs under sensible scrutiny and may strengthen our critical faculties.
Let us consider where we can go with all this. Adopting some soppy ‘let us all get on with it’ or ‘live and let live’ attitude misses an important point. Actions and opinions can do real harm. If A says B is worthy of attack (not necessarily physical) then C who agrees with A might carry out that action on B. This is documented when extreme views are allowed to be normalised such as now in many a place across the world. Good old David Hume had a great deal to say about strength of belief and is worth study (See An Enquirey Concerning Human Understanding ). In a different context George Orwell pointed to the way mass movements manipulate world views. Finally a good example of those to challenge would be anyone who claims to have all the answers or refuses to accept that they just might be wrong.
Bibliography:
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions – Thomas S. Kuhn
|
Publisher |
|
|---|---|
|
Publication date |
1962 (50th Anniversary Edition: 2012) |
|
Media type |
|
|
Pages |
264 |
An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)
David Hume
Published by Oxford University Press, USA, 1999
ISBN 10: 0198752482 / ISBN 13: 9780198752486
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_maynard_keynes.html
The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell : Volume 4 : In Front of Your Nose 1945-1950 Paperback – 26 Nov 1970
by George Orwell (Author), Sonia Orwell (Editor), Ian Angus (Editor)
An example of his writing.
* Boundless. “Group Behaviour.” Boundless Psychology. Boundless, 26 May. 2016. Retrieved 25 Nov. 2016 from https://www.boundless.com/psychology/textbooks/boundless-psychology-textbook/social-psychology-20/social-influence-104/group-behaviour-393-12928/
mikeberkoff's Blog 