tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post7304284019199286464..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: Shocking: People play events into biasesEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-89770561389242170192011-02-09T20:20:36.281-06:002011-02-09T20:20:36.281-06:00I agree that rationalization and willful blindness...I agree that rationalization and willful blindness are usually the way to bet. Sometimes, though, people really do change their minds from new evidence. Maybe especially when some piece of evidence that they've staked some credibility on collapses. The implosion of the USSR and the underperformance of the other central-planning darlings of the same era really did seem to change some people's minds, perhaps even as much as was logical. And I suspect the snow at Copenhagen caused even more shift in opinions about AGW than was logically warranted. That's not to say it caused a huge shift --- maybe it only shifted 1% of people's opinions or so. But logically it shouldn't've shifted people much at all, just weather in one small area for a short time. (I'm a strong critic of the IPCC position on AGW, I just don't think snow in Copenhagen is one of the strong arguments against it, so I've spent some time puzzling why that event seemed to get traction out of proportion to its logical importance.) Similarly my impression is that the Bellesiles affair had more impact on people's opinions about gun control than it should have for reasons of ordinary logical induction. Changing one's mind can be painful, but holding onto an increasingly embarrassing position can be painful too: decisions, decisions...William Newmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14336821309402794016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-2278390016118087482011-02-09T19:59:44.966-06:002011-02-09T19:59:44.966-06:00"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear an..."Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" - Simon and Garfunkel<br /><br />:PAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-59837796526979656692011-02-09T11:40:49.635-06:002011-02-09T11:40:49.635-06:00Eric, thanks for posting the study as it had an in...Eric, thanks for posting the study as it had an interesting design to it. We clearly anchor to our believes and seek out confirmatory biases so I always find examples in an experimental setting fascinating. I had not heard of the term "articulate confabulators" before but it is a great thought. - Adrian MeliAdrian Melinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-672401733915907222011-02-09T11:39:54.376-06:002011-02-09T11:39:54.376-06:00I have probably changed my mind once or twice in 3...I have probably changed my mind once or twice in 30 years on academic issues that I am fully vested in. But for the most part, like others, I are more likely to craft a ready response to an argument rather than update my beliefs.<br /><br />I am not sure I see a difference between what Haidt is claiming and what Festinger articulated about cognitive dissonance in the 50's.michael websterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08709023254632080905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-27197215837590873962011-02-08T23:28:58.532-06:002011-02-08T23:28:58.532-06:00I'm pretty sure I've linked to this here b...I'm pretty sure I've linked to <a href="http://thehackensack.blogspot.com/2008/10/more-from-irrational-electorate.html" rel="nofollow">this</a> here before, but it covers similar ground: A political scientist found that voters tend to pick their candidates first and then assume the candidates' positions on the issues, rather than chose which candidate to vote for based on the issues.Davehttp://steamcatapult.com/noreply@blogger.com