It is baffling to many of us why some people, most notably tRump supporters these days, will hold to certain beliefs DESPITE ALL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE INCORRECT! 

I know from my 72 years of associating with thousands of ALL sorts of people – super smart, Chief Justices, other professionals, homeless folks, drug addicts, criminals … and everyone in between, that there is NO understanding the human mind … but this article takes a stab at it and is a very good read.

This New Yorker article reminds me of why I used to subscribe. Today I have neither the money or the time!  🙂 Doing my work is #1!  I have read the entire article, and I recommend you read it too!

The article truly is about science, not politics, and you should read it.

Here is one excerpt which is spot on:  “Where it gets us into trouble, according to Sloman and Fernbach, is in the political domain. It’s one thing for me to flush a toilet without knowing how it operates, and another for me to favor (or oppose) an immigration ban without knowing what I’m talking about.

Sloman and Fernbach cite a survey conducted in 2014, not long after Russia annexed the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Respondents were asked how they thought the U.S. should react, and also whether they could identify Ukraine on a map. The farther off base they were about the geography, the more likely they were to favor military intervention. (Respondents were so unsure of Ukraine’s location that the median guess was wrong by eighteen hundred miles, roughly the distance from Kiev to Madrid.)”

and …

Surveys on many other issues have yielded similarly dismaying results. “As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding,” Sloman and Fernbach write. And here our dependence on other minds reinforces the problem. If your position on, say, the Affordable Care Act is baseless and I rely on it, then my opinion is also baseless. When I talk to Tom and he decides he agrees with me, his opinion is also baseless, but now that the three of us concur we feel that much more smug about our views. If we all now dismiss as unconvincing any information that contradicts our opinion, you get, well, the Trump Administration.

“This is how a community of knowledge can become dangerous,” Sloman and Fernbach observe. The two have performed their own version of the toilet experiment, substituting public policy for household gadgets. In a study conducted in 2012, they asked people for their stance on questions like: Should there be a single-payer health-care system? Or merit-based pay for teachers? Participants were asked to rate their positions depending on how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the proposals. Next, they were instructed to explain, in as much detail as they could, the impacts of implementing each one. Most people at this point ran into trouble. Asked once again to rate their views, they ratcheted down the intensity, so that they either agreed or disagreed less vehemently.

Sloman and Fernbach see in this result a little candle for a dark world. If we—or our friends or the pundits on CNN—spent less time pontificating and more trying to work through the implications of policy proposals, we’d realize how clueless we are and moderate our views. This, they write, “may be the only form of thinking that will shatter the illusion of explanatory depth and change people’s attitudes.”

Here is the Article:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds?utm_social-type=owned&mbid=social_facebook&utm_brand=tny&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3y3sZdXhdISWMTZAPDJ5v7ZzFeKz2DQn6p9cc6d7Cibst9c9YM7Nz-Yjk&fbclid=IwAR3ceFFN_MMj3n39IEZAUi9G3L8eRrEtd-78XMs8NaWMFD7J-0KzQUQwGK4