You can persuade and even convince people to change their beliefs. This can be done, for example, by showing them evidence. But that's not what I think HRC meant by formal deprogramming. And I would not want to make a case for formal deprogramming anyone.
тАЬSometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't fit in with the core belief.тАЭ
100%. In some cases there may be a path down the mountain if you choose the path carefully and don't show your companion the chasm that you're avoiding since s/he will naturally recoil from that. In other cases you may not be able to find path down your companion can tolerate. At the same time there are those who are nearly ready to come down and just need to know there are compassionate friends in the valley and then they can start to accept your guidance. You can only do what you can do.
Does this mean that you think Trump's supporters can't be convinced? I think they can, but the Fanon quote implies, I think, that you are skeptical. I'm curious because that seems to be the attitude of many, many Democratic voters, thus the appeal to deprogramming.
I think it depends on who you're trying to persuade, the nature of their beliefs, and the way you go about it.
Or let me put it another way, I don't want to be fatalistically cynical and would instead prefer to imagine that some people can change their mind. This may be wishful thinking but I think I need some of that. Cognitive dissonance isn't always present or dominant. Sometimes no more than ignorance or incorrect understanding is involved and these are the preconditions to learning.
I can go along with that. Are political beliefs typically core? Probably some are, like someone who grows up in a labor union family and community. But an adult who repeats some pro or anti Trump zingers from time to time, maybe not.
It also depends on how long they have held that core belief and what age they were when they first acquired it. Take the climate alarmists, the big lie that the earth is about to incinerate due to global warming caused by human agency has been around so long that two generations of school children have imbibed it at a very early and impressionable age, with their mother's milk as it were. Many are now the most extreme kind of activist because facing the truth, any sort of fact or evidence that goes against this lie is too painful to tolerate. We are here not talking about mere cognitive dissonance but a frontal attack on their very being. And so they try to turn the lie, the false prophecy, into a self-fulfilling prophecy by starting forest fires, etc.
I think it depends on the person and the approach. In my experience, it can, but how you present the evidence is key. Although that being said, there's plenty of research suggesting you are right about the power of evidence to convince.
The concept becomes a bit problematic when alleged тАЬNazisтАЭ elect a Jewish President and, according to a new Pew survey, are among the least antisemitic in Europe. Putin simply uses тАЬNaziтАЭ to smear anyone who opposes Russian domination.
And the point that was made is that it has been proven not to work, so she is spouting party line nonsense.
We could as easily make a case for deprogramming Democrats who can't seem to see the Nazi's in Ukraine. Supporting Nazi's used to be a bad thing.
You can persuade and even convince people to change their beliefs. This can be done, for example, by showing them evidence. But that's not what I think HRC meant by formal deprogramming. And I would not want to make a case for formal deprogramming anyone.
тАЬSometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't fit in with the core belief.тАЭ
тАХ Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks
100%. In some cases there may be a path down the mountain if you choose the path carefully and don't show your companion the chasm that you're avoiding since s/he will naturally recoil from that. In other cases you may not be able to find path down your companion can tolerate. At the same time there are those who are nearly ready to come down and just need to know there are compassionate friends in the valley and then they can start to accept your guidance. You can only do what you can do.
Does this mean that you think Trump's supporters can't be convinced? I think they can, but the Fanon quote implies, I think, that you are skeptical. I'm curious because that seems to be the attitude of many, many Democratic voters, thus the appeal to deprogramming.
No, cognitive dissonance doesn't just apply to Trump supporters, Team D supporters or any other group.
Evidence doesn't convince many people very often.
I think it depends on who you're trying to persuade, the nature of their beliefs, and the way you go about it.
Or let me put it another way, I don't want to be fatalistically cynical and would instead prefer to imagine that some people can change their mind. This may be wishful thinking but I think I need some of that. Cognitive dissonance isn't always present or dominant. Sometimes no more than ignorance or incorrect understanding is involved and these are the preconditions to learning.
I absolutely agree. But then I have to, or I'd be completely hopeless about changing the world we currently live in, and I don't want to go there.
I would say that evidence is more effective at changing non-core beliefs, beliefs that define who humans are and what tribe they belong to.
I can go along with that. Are political beliefs typically core? Probably some are, like someone who grows up in a labor union family and community. But an adult who repeats some pro or anti Trump zingers from time to time, maybe not.
They can be.
It also depends on how long they have held that core belief and what age they were when they first acquired it. Take the climate alarmists, the big lie that the earth is about to incinerate due to global warming caused by human agency has been around so long that two generations of school children have imbibed it at a very early and impressionable age, with their mother's milk as it were. Many are now the most extreme kind of activist because facing the truth, any sort of fact or evidence that goes against this lie is too painful to tolerate. We are here not talking about mere cognitive dissonance but a frontal attack on their very being. And so they try to turn the lie, the false prophecy, into a self-fulfilling prophecy by starting forest fires, etc.
I think it depends on the person and the approach. In my experience, it can, but how you present the evidence is key. Although that being said, there's plenty of research suggesting you are right about the power of evidence to convince.
The concept becomes a bit problematic when alleged тАЬNazisтАЭ elect a Jewish President and, according to a new Pew survey, are among the least antisemitic in Europe. Putin simply uses тАЬNaziтАЭ to smear anyone who opposes Russian domination.
They're not alleged Nazis. They're actual Nazis.
Allegedly. (d'oh!)
Pro-Ukraine commenter: uses facts to support their point of view
Anti-Ukraine commenter: uses smears and ad hominem to try and silence dissenting views without making an argument.
Now, I'm not *saying* you're a paid Russian troll, but you could hardly be more dishonest if you were.
Thanks for the sensible debunk, but sadly I doubt you'll make any headway with the brianwashed cultists in this comment section :/
...all of whom need reprogramming.
Some of them probably do, yes.
If you've been brainwashed, you need deprogramming. It's a pretty simple concept, glad you could figure it out.