Amygdala speaks:Of backfire effect,cognitive dissonance and other idiosyncrasies
Have you ever gotten into an argument with someone? Tried to convince them to your perspective on any particular topic? I'm sure you have, and it would be fairly reasonable to assume that everyone on this planet has, at least once. Indulge me for a minute and imagine that you are in the middle of one such discussion now. Let me paint that picture a little more vividly for you.Assume for the moment that you are right in whatever you're saying.If it's not too much of a liberty, let's also assume that you articulate your arguments eloquently and coherently, using facts and statistics to validate the truth of what you're saying. Now, can you tell me without a doubt what the conclusion of this argument would be? Are you sure you can win over your opponent and change their beliefs merely by being factually correct? No. It could happen, but it's not a certain outcome. But why is that? If you're correct, it makes sense for the other person to accept your ideas, right?
That's not how life works though.We're often greeted by strong resistance and a stubborn refusal on the part of the other person to even listen leave alone accept, and we sometimes throw up our hands in frustration and say I give up.I cannot convince this guy.I have observed this beahvior several times and this is one of the primary reasons why I refuse to get into arguments.I remain a mute spectator, although I might actually have things to say. Because, deep down, the skeptic in me recalls the adage 'People who are convinced against their will are of the same opinion still'. There is no point to it.
Here's another question for you to ponder upon.In this age where we are inundated with more information than we can process, it would seem that right would always triumph over wrong.Because the facts are available to all of us, and at that,merely a click away.We should be living in a utopian world where people search the net about something, process all the results fairly and then change their opinions if they are not justified. Does it actually happen? Are we any closer to such a world than a century ago? Rumours,gossip and insanity are as rampant today as they were in the days of newspapers, if not more.People only see what they want to see. Everything else is rejected, either by denouncing it as falsehood or under other suitable pretenses.
I have wondered, what is it that governs this behavior of ours? Pyschology must have investigated,classified and reported the findings on this.Therefore, after a particularly frustrating incident along the same lines, I started digging up the internet for information that could help me make sense of this behavior. Sure enough, Google gave me enough to chew on.
There is a phenomenon which goes by the name of cognitive dissonance. I read many articles explaining it, but nothing was as subtly powerful as one of the analogies I found. I am paraphrasing it as best as I can: Imagine that you are building something. What is your end goal? Stability. That the structure does not collapse. Therefore, what would you do? Try as best as you can to protect and defend it from any external instabilities. Your thoughts are the structure your mind is trying to build. And the mind wants consistency. It cannot deal with anything that is conflicting to these thoughts. If presented with such opinions, its first mechanism is to go into a defensive mode and try to preserve its state. Logically, how would it do that? Simple. Reject any contrary opinions. As time goes by, your thoughts become beliefs and the moat around them becomes wider. The fort around them gets stronger. Soon, you reach such a state that you instantaneously dismiss any opinion that is not in harmony with the picture you have in mind.
And the icing on the cake is backfire effect. When in a state of conflict, you would expect your brain to side with facts, right? Wrong. Because of backfire effect, it is highly probable that despite facts and evidence to the contrary ,your brain will choose to retain its original stance and hold on to it even more strongly than before. You will find a way to somehow wave away all other things. Science has shown...this is beyond science. These are the figures..they must have been manipulated. Now think of an argument this way: both parties have their thoughts fortifed behind an unbreakable barrier, and every argument that is presented to one party only causes that person to retreat farther behind the barrier. Back and forth, with no effect other than to worsen the gap in their ideas. Put this way, it does seem an exercise in futility,doesn't it? That frustration you felt is only to be expected. :)
N.B: "Keep an open mind" has been one of the central philosophies governing my life,attitude and reactions. Or so I've told myself all these years. But like everything else, it is far easier to say it than to practise it. Psychology is one of my favorite poisons and I am particularly fascinated by all the ways in which our neural pathways for thinking are hardwired. In a nutshell, I like investigating all the hurdles the human brain presents to unbiased thinking.Something akin to insider attacks in cyber security parlance.This series Amygdala speaks will be presenting a variety of these phenomena in layman terms.Sometime down the line, I also aspire to write about how to overcome these things--but that's a distant dream for now.
If you're looking for stuff to read on this,here are a few articles you could start out with :
1)https://psychohawks.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/cognitive-dissonance-made-easy/
2)http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe
3)https://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/
4)https://www.kornferry.com/institute/understanding-bias-and-brain
5)https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/cognitive_dissonance
The name Amygdala speaks, as you might have guessed if you looked it up on the net, is because Amygdala is the region in the brain that's associated with emotional learning and preference formation. Basically,biases. Also because the name sounds cool:P
That's not how life works though.We're often greeted by strong resistance and a stubborn refusal on the part of the other person to even listen leave alone accept, and we sometimes throw up our hands in frustration and say I give up.I cannot convince this guy.I have observed this beahvior several times and this is one of the primary reasons why I refuse to get into arguments.I remain a mute spectator, although I might actually have things to say. Because, deep down, the skeptic in me recalls the adage 'People who are convinced against their will are of the same opinion still'. There is no point to it.
Here's another question for you to ponder upon.In this age where we are inundated with more information than we can process, it would seem that right would always triumph over wrong.Because the facts are available to all of us, and at that,merely a click away.We should be living in a utopian world where people search the net about something, process all the results fairly and then change their opinions if they are not justified. Does it actually happen? Are we any closer to such a world than a century ago? Rumours,gossip and insanity are as rampant today as they were in the days of newspapers, if not more.People only see what they want to see. Everything else is rejected, either by denouncing it as falsehood or under other suitable pretenses.
I have wondered, what is it that governs this behavior of ours? Pyschology must have investigated,classified and reported the findings on this.Therefore, after a particularly frustrating incident along the same lines, I started digging up the internet for information that could help me make sense of this behavior. Sure enough, Google gave me enough to chew on.
There is a phenomenon which goes by the name of cognitive dissonance. I read many articles explaining it, but nothing was as subtly powerful as one of the analogies I found. I am paraphrasing it as best as I can: Imagine that you are building something. What is your end goal? Stability. That the structure does not collapse. Therefore, what would you do? Try as best as you can to protect and defend it from any external instabilities. Your thoughts are the structure your mind is trying to build. And the mind wants consistency. It cannot deal with anything that is conflicting to these thoughts. If presented with such opinions, its first mechanism is to go into a defensive mode and try to preserve its state. Logically, how would it do that? Simple. Reject any contrary opinions. As time goes by, your thoughts become beliefs and the moat around them becomes wider. The fort around them gets stronger. Soon, you reach such a state that you instantaneously dismiss any opinion that is not in harmony with the picture you have in mind.
And the icing on the cake is backfire effect. When in a state of conflict, you would expect your brain to side with facts, right? Wrong. Because of backfire effect, it is highly probable that despite facts and evidence to the contrary ,your brain will choose to retain its original stance and hold on to it even more strongly than before. You will find a way to somehow wave away all other things. Science has shown...this is beyond science. These are the figures..they must have been manipulated. Now think of an argument this way: both parties have their thoughts fortifed behind an unbreakable barrier, and every argument that is presented to one party only causes that person to retreat farther behind the barrier. Back and forth, with no effect other than to worsen the gap in their ideas. Put this way, it does seem an exercise in futility,doesn't it? That frustration you felt is only to be expected. :)
N.B: "Keep an open mind" has been one of the central philosophies governing my life,attitude and reactions. Or so I've told myself all these years. But like everything else, it is far easier to say it than to practise it. Psychology is one of my favorite poisons and I am particularly fascinated by all the ways in which our neural pathways for thinking are hardwired. In a nutshell, I like investigating all the hurdles the human brain presents to unbiased thinking.Something akin to insider attacks in cyber security parlance.This series Amygdala speaks will be presenting a variety of these phenomena in layman terms.Sometime down the line, I also aspire to write about how to overcome these things--but that's a distant dream for now.
If you're looking for stuff to read on this,here are a few articles you could start out with :
1)https://psychohawks.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/cognitive-dissonance-made-easy/
2)http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe
3)https://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/
4)https://www.kornferry.com/institute/understanding-bias-and-brain
5)https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/cognitive_dissonance
The name Amygdala speaks, as you might have guessed if you looked it up on the net, is because Amygdala is the region in the brain that's associated with emotional learning and preference formation. Basically,biases. Also because the name sounds cool:P
Comments
Post a Comment