There is another important aspect: The observed or assumed power of the information givers and with it the potential danger for the individual: Psychology calls it 'perceptional defense'. That means, presented informations are blocked already in the process of perceiving! They do not enter memory.
That makes it easy for governments and media to let us think so easily that, e.g. planes flew into the WTCs or the pentagon or the other historical lies. It would be a real danger for the desired feeling of beeing safe in their lifes! This is, how it works,...too. And the responsible ones know that all. This and more...

no.1 its true: do not mix perception and memory
no.2 yes. e.g.: in one of the videos (from ground) you can see a plane for 1-2secs passing one burning tower. It is not mentioned in the official reports. - A planes nose cannot penetrate a building w/o deformation. - the visible hole in pentagon w/o no destruction next to it cannot be inflicted by a plane.- aso, aso. everybody can see. most do it blindfolded.
The question is: why do you believe their story ...

Edited 5/9/2017 20:01:41

I very much enjoyed the comic, Agreed with the psychology aspects and makes me believe the capacity to change to differentiate the emotional and logical vortex is a valuable one for today's world leaders. I wonderfully wander in thought of the business world and wonder if the very top business leaders have a emotional cortex to one of let's say a employee with a secure job with everything in good order with the free time to perhaps develop ones values hence increasing the emotional cortex. There is a study according to a source of a friend that says most of the world's Business leaders are psychopathic meaning no emotional cortex. Would they be more willing to change? By theory yes!

Wandering through the comments here ,

Interestingly , I've never felt a huge variation of Cognitive Disconnance on a political issues where new information was revealed. I rather think logically them emotionally , Probably the opposite when I lead Outlaws but whatever :)

I think in a world that's technologically advancing at rates which are crazy with the even more influx of education , I believe people are changing from being a conservative to being more let's say "changeable". Politically the systems or mechanisms in place have to change to meet the needs of the population. Issues such as abortion , death penalty and belief in God are statistically changing. Changing will always happen in a society , It's about making the logically viable choices to keep up with societal changes that matter.

Edited 5/9/2017 20:53:37

This was great! :)

God I hate the oatmeal (the maker of this comic). he might be right in this instance,but his stuff is 9 times out of 10 trash. Nazis gonna Nazi, Commies gonna commie, muzzies gonna muz, libtards gonna lib, and the rest of us just kinda have to do our best to deal with it and live our lives

God I hate the oatmeal (the maker of this comic). he might be right in this instance,but his stuff is 9 times out of 10 trash.

Although formulated in a rather negative way, I do think this brings up a valid point.

It's often very difficult to distinguish between the messenger and the message. When you know that the messenger has certain tendencies or leaning, it's difficult not to view the message in that light.

In politics: nobody will take Trump seriously if he would suddenly say: "Immigrants are amazing, we should welcome them with open arms" and neither would anyone believe Elizabeth Warren if she were to say: "I think the rich should pay less taxes and we can easily save that money by putting a stop on abortion funding."

Nevertheless, people from opposing ideologies may sometimes have ideas that are perfectly acceptable even for their biggest criticasters. But the messenger itself may already cause a backfire effect and the idea that an opponent might have something useful to say may by itself already be cause for cognitive dissonance.

EDIT: fixed some minor spelling and grammar mistakes.

Edited 5/10/2017 12:27:58

The guy who made the comic makes comics of cats

Such a beautiful thread <3

AKA genetic fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

OT is really, really bad at that. this thread for example, if i had posted the exact same thing it would simply have drawn insults and it would already been hidden.

Yeah, well, that's the thing. You wouldn't have posted something like this.

This comic does not advocate critical thinking. It advocates listening to opposing opinions and then accepting them as facts.

While I get it, I didn't have any problems with anything listed as a fact. The issue I have is I usually only get angry about something that's wrong in a dangerous or misleading way, or that is an injustice to someone and yet they only show complacency.

Not exactly sure what the solution to this is though, other than accept that people are wrong and hurt each other? I mean, it's not like I can usually stop them anyway, but it makes my blood boil and I have to at least try :/

I get that sense of "not letting them get away with it" which I know has evolved as a social requirement, stopping a member of a group hurting others even at your own expense (obviously, the best survival route is to ignore them, hurting others is a benefit to you in a non-social species)

I think really all this is just a condensed form of this, the internet intensifies that because we feel more connected, and feel that something wrong could effect the whole world. Perhaps these are different emotions though, since I don't mind being confronted with facts that are different to my understanding, since that brings about learning, which I think is what the comic is focusing on here.

i dont belieeeeve in faaaairy tales

(no do not)

i dont belieeeeve in faaaairy tales

(no do not)

i dont belieeeeve in faaaairy tales

but i belieeeeeve in youuuuuu and meeeeeeee

TAKE ME TO WONDERLANNND

TAkE ME TO

TAKE ME TO

TAKE ME TO WONDERLAND

TAKE ME TO

TAKE ME TO

TAKE ME TO WONDERLAND

TAKE ME TO

TAKE ME TO

TAKE ME TO WONDERLAND

WONDERLAND, WONDERLANNNND

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-LxTP6zLVI)

Edited 5/12/2017 13:57:38

That comic is cool, but... I don't see anyone here saying they don't experience cognitive dissonance. Am I the only one? :v If I'm wrong, tell me why and if you're right I'll change my mind. What's so hard about it? Isn't it normal to not want to believe in bullshit? Why would you even defend a wrong belief...?

Interestingly , I've never felt a huge variation of Cognitive Disconnance on a political issues where new information was revealed. I rather think logically them emotionally

It is important to remember that it is much easier to see cognitive dissonance in someone else than in yourself. When you go through cognitive dissonance, you aren't likely to be aware that it is happening - you believe you are rejecting the new information, simply because it is false, not because you want to believe it to be false.

It's fine to reject unsourced claims that seem false, but if given sources, it is generally worthwhile to critically examine them to see to what extent there is any truth in them.

The other side holds as well: when given unsourced information that seems true, it is worth investigating it as well to make sure your preconceived notions aren't leading you astray.

Good stuff!

Firstly
What this comic is about is not cognitive dissonance but cognitive consistency there seems to be some confusion there.

Secondly
Everyone's needs a lot of cognitive consistency..... you can't go through life constantly questioning everything and focus on if it fits in your world picture and if your understanding of everthing is fundementally wrong. I think the concept of cognitive consistency, is likely not thought to its limit when it is presented as purely a negative thing(which it almost always is).

Another way of viewing the idea of cognitive consistency is as core beliefs,(as is mentioned), so what is the goal here? That you should be open to all ideas equally? Then you would have a person whit out core beliefs, and i would not say that such a being would qualify as a human in any way as we normally understands this nor as i said function in the world at all since all this person could ever do was to reevaluate everything.

thirdly
The understanding of the nature of truth here seems to be given as something unproblematic, something that can unproblematic be found whit a open mind(what ever that is) in much the same way as if you were looking for a material object, forexsampel misplaced car keys.

What the comic used for examples is also therefore factual historical examples. This however is not what the comic is aiming at, since you could convince all but the most die hard conspiracy theorists about such things if you just gave them sufficient evidence for it. What it is aming at is more general, and when it comes to all other things than facts like thise the truth get somewhat more unclear.

So i think what is most though provoking about this comic is the total lack of thought in it.

Edited 5/12/2017 22:47:15

I disagree with anything which implies change is always good, which is very false. Change can be very bad in some cases, some ideas should be intensely rejected. Change can be good too, but it all depends on whats changing. Changing the right things makes the world better. Change the wrong things and it all falls apart.

I think there isn't "bad", "good" or "right things" ;) A change is only a change.
http://awakeningtimes.com/the-old-man-and-his-horse-a-chinese-story/

Hey if my English would be on enough level, I would write a lot in this topic :|
Unluck...
or luck.
Who knows? ;)