Why/How Does Cognitive Dissonance and Hypocrisy Exist?

[dgiharris]

My entire life, I've suffered from an affliction that seems to separate me from my other homo sapiens. In a nutshell, the root of my thinking and feelings seem to be firmly rooted in basic mathematical properties and what I will call cognitive harmony.

If A = B ; and B = C ; then A = C.
If it is wrong for person Q to do action XYZ, then (if all things are equal) if person R does action XYZ it is also wrong...

If the reasons I thought XYZ were wrong turned out to be in error, and that error is shown to me, then I will no longer believe XYZ is wrong.

The above is a quick snapshot of my psychology, basic math and cognitive harmony. It is almost painful for me to hold beliefs that conflict with one another and that pain forces me to seek harmony which means changing my viewpoints and beliefs when I receive new information or if previous information I thought was true turned out to be false.

I sincerely can not understand why other people are not the same. Logically, I would guess that for others there is no "pain" from cognitive dissonance? And since there is no pain there is no incentive to seek consistency in thought?

I don't understand why so many people seem to accept logical fallacies or employ logical fallacies in their arguments or are unable to recognize when they employ a logical fallacy?

I don't understand why someone will be opposed to action M because of reasons 123 but then when reasons 123 are proven to be false that said person will STILL oppose action M.

So I would like to open this up for discussion.

Why is cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy so prevalent among homo sapiens-- especially in political arenas.

 

[Petros2015]

At the extreme, people will only accept facts as proof if they confirm their beliefs. We will 'see what we want to see', i.e. what confirms the beliefs and ignore the rest. It seems to be some kind of Core filter. this reduces cognitive dissonance by screening out what would conflict or cause pain. Producing contradictory facts doesn't change the mind of the person receiving them, all it does is make them hate the contradictory fact producer. And they will then look for and distribute facts to confirm their view of the contradictory fact producer.

I hate to be the one to tell you, but you are living in a world full of insane people (to varying degrees).

John 3:19-21

 

[jayem]

That's a variation of what economists call the Sunk Cost Fallacy. If a lot of money and effort has been put into a project, it becomes difficult to abandon, even if it's clearly apparent that the project is likely to fail. Though the costs have sunk and are non-recoverable, we'll keep spending on it. The same thing occurs with beliefs. The greater the emotional investment we have in the correctness of our beliefs--political, religious, philosophical, or whatever--the more firmly we cling to them despite all evidence to the contrary. Why does it happen? I suspect that our brains are wired this way. It's just how we process information and make decisions. Mental perseverance may have had some kind of survival value and was favored by natural selection.

The Sunk Cost Fallacy

 

[Petros2015]

Why does it happen? I suspect that our brains are wired this way. It's just how we process information and make decisions.

I would agree but say it goes deeper than the brain and into the Soul - it is 'the default setting'. Being wrong means having to re-evaluate ourselves against some standard. Or to put it another cynical way, "being in love with yourself means never having to say you are sorry"

Not exactly on topic, but not entirely off either

 

[Ana the Ist]

My entire life, I've suffered from an affliction that seems to separate me from my other homo sapiens. In a nutshell, the root of my thinking and feelings seem to be firmly rooted in basic mathematical properties and what I will call cognitive harmony.

If A = B ; and B = C ; then A = C.
If it is wrong for person Q to do action XYZ, then (if all things are equal) if person R does action XYZ it is also wrong...

If the reasons I thought XYZ were wrong turned out to be in error, and that error is shown to me, then I will no longer believe XYZ is wrong.

The above is a quick snapshot of my psychology, basic math and cognitive harmony. It is almost painful for me to hold beliefs that conflict with one another and that pain forces me to seek harmony which means changing my viewpoints and beliefs when I receive new information or if previous information I thought was true turned out to be false.

I sincerely can not understand why other people are not the same. Logically, I would guess that for others there is no "pain" from cognitive dissonance? And since there is no pain there is no incentive to seek consistency in thought?

I don't understand why so many people seem to accept logical fallacies or employ logical fallacies in their arguments or are unable to recognize when they employ a logical fallacy?

I don't understand why someone will be opposed to action M because of reasons 123 but then when reasons 123 are proven to be false that said person will STILL oppose action M.

So I would like to open this up for discussion.

Why is cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy so prevalent among homo sapiens-- especially in political arenas.

I would say that a lot of times, logical reasoning/thinking is abandoned for emotional reasons. If we were to look at the world according to what can be proven...and didn't believe in that which cannot be proven...we would all be accepting some conclusions which many would describe as "harsh/ugly/uncomfortable".

People don't want to believe in such truths...typically, people only believe in them when they become unavoidable. If you were to ask me why...I'd say that it's because, by nature, we're very emotional animals. Being able to access, act upon, and recognize emotions are great for understanding each other and socializing on a daily basis. When it comes to the matter of understanding truth however, emotions typically just get in the way.

As a result, people end up with a lot of contradictory beliefs...maybe they're holding onto one because of how it makes them feel...maybe they're holding onto both because of how they make them feel. It's a very human thing to do...and I try not to hold it against people too much.

 

[Mountainmike]

If you look at psychological factors, e.g. Read " influence " by cialdini - the seminal work in persuasion- the sunk cost fallacy you describe is in essence a special case of the psychological force of "consistency"

For example those who bough a get rich quick scheme will recommend it to others long after it becomes painfully obvious at an objective level that it is failing, so they are seen to be consistent.

As regards the OP , I would prefer examples, because Claims of cognitive dissonance can be subjective to frame of reference, that is , the dissonance only exists because of a contradiction in the observers a priori beliefs about those things which are conjectured to contradict. The analogy to A=B only holds in the subjective frame of reference.


For example ( I choose a random example) " those who believe that the shroud of Turin is christs burial cloth have cognitive dissonance because it dates to 1350" which only holds true if you believe that radio carbon dating is innerrant.

The reality is there is no dissonance, because the ratio of C14 to C12 is not an inviolate relationship with age. For example - neutron radiation can change that ratio at will. Indeed all sorts of anomalies have occurred throughout dating history,so the ratio of C14 to C12 is evidence, proof of nothing.

So the dissonance is a belief, not a fact.

That's a variation of what economists call the Sunk Cost Fallacy. If a lot of money and effort has been put into a project, it becomes difficult to abandon, even if it's clearly apparent that the project is likely to fail. Though the costs have sunk and are non-recoverable, we'll keep spending on it. The same thing occurs with beliefs. The greater the emotional investment we have in the correctness of our beliefs--political, religious, philosophical, or whatever--the more firmly we cling to them despite all evidence to the contrary. Why does it happen? I suspect that our brains are wired this way. It's just how we process information and make decisions. Mental perseverance may have had some kind of survival value and was favored by natural selection.

The Sunk Cost Fallacy

 

[bhsmte]

My entire life, I've suffered from an affliction that seems to separate me from my other homo sapiens. In a nutshell, the root of my thinking and feelings seem to be firmly rooted in basic mathematical properties and what I will call cognitive harmony.

If A = B ; and B = C ; then A = C.
If it is wrong for person Q to do action XYZ, then (if all things are equal) if person R does action XYZ it is also wrong...

If the reasons I thought XYZ were wrong turned out to be in error, and that error is shown to me, then I will no longer believe XYZ is wrong.

The above is a quick snapshot of my psychology, basic math and cognitive harmony. It is almost painful for me to hold beliefs that conflict with one another and that pain forces me to seek harmony which means changing my viewpoints and beliefs when I receive new information or if previous information I thought was true turned out to be false.

I sincerely can not understand why other people are not the same. Logically, I would guess that for others there is no "pain" from cognitive dissonance? And since there is no pain there is no incentive to seek consistency in thought?

I don't understand why so many people seem to accept logical fallacies or employ logical fallacies in their arguments or are unable to recognize when they employ a logical fallacy?

I don't understand why someone will be opposed to action M because of reasons 123 but then when reasons 123 are proven to be false that said person will STILL oppose action M.

So I would like to open this up for discussion.

Why is cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy so prevalent among homo sapiens-- especially in political arenas.

How much cognitive dissonance one incurs, depends on their personal psyche. In some folks, they have strong psychological needs, that generate the need to believe certain things and these beliefs are filling a need for them. If these beliefs happen to be one's that are easily challenged in regards to their credibility, the person will suffer cognitive dissonance. In many people, it is too painful to acknowledge any evidence that counters their belief, so they build strong defense mechanisms to protect the belief. In other people, it becomes too painful to keep denying well evidenced reality and engaging in psychological gymnastics and they eventually let go of the belief, when the pain of denying, becomes greater than the pain of giving up the belief.

This site, presents many opportunities, to observe all of the above.

 

[Moral Orel]

Cognitive dissonance from Coach:

 

[Paradoxum]

Sometimes people don't believe ideas for the reasons stated. They believe for non-rational reasons, and then give reasons for why they believe. So it doesn't matter so much is the reasons are disproven.

 

[The-Doctor]

Because some people refuse to accept what is right in front of them...yes it is bigger on the inside.

 

[dgiharris]

Cognitive dissonance from Coach:

I remember watching that and thinking "What...."

I had to listen to it twice because at first I thought I misheard him. "...I've been on welfare and foodstamps. Did anybody help me out? No!"...

ummm.... welfare and foodstamps is helping you out don't you think?