Boy, it takes some rather long explaining to get through to you.............
ciscop wrote:You know
even thought it is your native language and this is my 3rd language
it seems you fail to understand what cog. dissonance means and how people react to it
I'm guessing you haven't really looked into the definition of "cognitive dissonance." Otherwise, you'd agree with what I'm saying. There are 3 elements to it:
The person who experiences cognitive dissonance 1) "holds two contradictory ideas
simultaneously," 2) this causes that person discomfort
, and 3) that person will change his/her behavior
in order to accommodate such a discomfort. "Hold" in this case means "Keep
in mind or convey as a conviction or view," and contradictory means "Two propositions [ideas] are contradictories if both cannot be true
Let's analyze Blackmore's statement:
1) You may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings,
2) I begin to feel uncomfortable
3) and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow."
1) The "positive findings" are contradictory to what her core belief/idea about psi is, which is that it doesn't exist.
2) Why should she feel uncomfortable about "positive findings?" If she really believes psi is false, don't you agree there should be no discomfort in evaluating "psi-positive" evidence? Don't you agree she would feel that the "positive findings" are most likely not positive and easily dismissible? Performing the duty
of evaluating parapsychological claims should not per se create any discomfort, as that's what Blackmore does all the time. After all, she is a parapsychologist; it's her "job," so there should be no discomfort in the act
of evaluating such evidence. What we are left pondering is why she feels this discomfort.
If she actually believes deep down inside that psi is false, there should be no discomfort in evaluating psi evidence, just like there should be no discomfort in evaluating evidence that fairies exist. However, if there is data that results in a threat to her conviction that psi is false, then that would most likely create discomfort. Therefore, we can assume that her discomfort is due to her thinking the psi evidence presented might indeed be possibly valid
. The discomfort is a result of a challenge, or threat, the evidence presents. If she really believed psi evidence was not threatening, we could infer she would feel no dissonance having to evaluate such evidence.
3) Her reaction, her behavior, to this discomfort is to put the evidence away "to read tomorrow."
It's really that simple, not difficult to comprehend.
ciscop wrote:it means i feel discomfort in losing time in reading about something i know it doesnt exist, THAT´S COG. DISSONANCE
Boy are you wrong here. You are creating a false analogy. Blackmore does this all the time--evaluate psi evidence. Why would she feel she's "losing time" doing it considering she's a parapsychologist? If she feels it doesn't exist, there should be no discomfort. If she simply doesn't want to read it because she feels it's a waist of time to do so, she can put it down and forget about it. Either way, there should be no discomfort at all. Whether she puts it down and never reads it or reads it later, or even reads it now, it should not cause her any cognitive dissonance evaluating something she indeed believes is false.
Just look at her long list of publications; it's filled with parapsychological papers: http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/publicat.htm
cognitive dissonance in this case because you cannot demonstrate Blackmore would feel it's a "waist of time." She does it all the time. Just read her published works. She loves doing this stuff!Therefore, your argument that Blackmore experiences cognitive dissonance because it would be a "waist of time for her to evaluate something she doesn't believe in (i.e, psi))" is unequivocally false.
ciscop wrote:just like you will throw away a panflet of scientology or put it down
it doesnt mean you also THINK WE COME FROM XENU
You are creating another
false analogy. Your analogy above is analogous with my 2nd example below.
Before I provide the examples, let's dissect your "analogy:"
1) I'm given a "a panflet of scientology" to evaluate.
2) I begin to feel uncomfortable.
3) I am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow."
Why would #2 occur? If I absolutely believe Scientology is false and have no problem putting in the time to read the literature anyway, why should there be any discomfort? Where are the two contradictory ideas I "hold?" Whether I put it away for later, throw it in the trash, or read it now, it would NOT cause me any discomfort because I firmly do NOT believe in Scientology. Even if I thought it was a waist of time to read the evidence, there'd still be no discomfort, as I simply don't have to read it. Therefore, no cognitive dissonance occurs.
1st example: Let's say, for example, I believe Scientology is false and that there is no way I believe it could ever be proven true. Let's also say it's my job, or my hobby, to evaluate evidence supporting Scientology. I should feel no cognitive dissonance unless I hold
the contradictory idea that Scientology might
be real. Forget about the act of evaluating it (i.e, the work involved), as that's work that's par for the course, not an idea that threatens my belief(s); therefore, the act of evaluating the evidence per se is not part of the dissonant equation. If I really hold the conviction that all evidence supporting Scientology is false, I should feel no discomfort, as I will not hold both the ideas that 1) Scientology is
real and 2) Scientology is not
real. However, if I do feel
discomfort, then it indicates I hold these two contradictory ideas in my mind. Why else would it be uncomfortable otherwise?
2nd example: In contrast, let's say, for example, I don't care to evaluate Scientology evidence or that no matter what evidence was provided to me it wouldn't matter, as I'd still believe Scientology is false. Even if I did put down the evidence to read at a later time, the act of putting it down or reading it later would not cause me discomfort because I've already made up my mind. I do not hold the simultaneous ideas that 1) Scientology is
real and 2) Scientology is not
real, nor do I hold the idea that "WE COME FROM XENU." I only
believe Scientology is false, and no amount of Scientology-positive evidence will ever cause me any discomfort, as I do not, and will not, hold the idea that Scientology is real. Therefore, there is no cognitive dissonance. Consequently, I will put away the evidence or read it; either way, I've made up my mind--no dissonance. So, your analogy above is analogous to this 2nd example.
Blackmore fits example #1 perfectly!Using the definition above for cognitive dissonance (which is correct), we can infer from Blackmore's statement that she 1) simultaneously keeps in her mind or conveys as a conviction or view the two ideas that [a] psi might exist and [b] psi might not exist, which both cannot be true, 2) this causes her discomfort, and 3) she puts away the evidence to "to read tomorrow."
On a separate note, I actually asked a few coworkers how they'd react if a person came to them with evidence that fairies exist. I asked them if they'd feel uncomfortable
reviewing the "positive evidence." Every single coworker said, "No, I wouldn't feel uncomfortable." I then asked, "Why is that?" They each said (in essence), "Because I know fairies don't
exist; that's silly!" They wouldn't experience cognitive dissonance unless they actually held the contradictory idea the evidence could possibly be valid. I then asked, "What if the evidence was very convincing and contained lots of empirically obtained data?" They reacted in an uncomfortable manner, and of course they did--it threatens their convictions fairies don't exist!
Now, if I forced my coworkers to evaluate the fairy evidence, they'd most likely experience cognitive dissonance, but in Blackmore's case, no one is forcing her to evaluate the evidence. She does it at her own free will. It's what she does all the time!Try this experiment yourself.In other words, people who experience cognitive dissonance when faced with psi-positive evidence most likely believe it's possible such evidence might be valid, which threatens their convictions that psi is false, and this creates discomfort and the resultant behavior. This also applies to believers as well: people who experience cognitive dissonance when faced with psi-negative evidence most likely believe it's possible such evidence might be valid, which threatens their convictions that psi is real, and this creates discomfort and the resultant behavior.
The only thing you base your argument on is the presumption that Blackmore feels it's a waist of time to evaluate psi-positive evidence, which you have no evidence to support, and, rather, evidence to the contrary exists: http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/publicat.htm
Furthermore, let me clue you in as to why she feels this way. There are clues. These are her own words:
Susan Blackmore wrote:The other major challenge to the skeptic's position is, of course, the fact that opposing positive evidence exists in the parapsychological literature. I couldn't dismiss it all. This raises an interesting question: just how much weight can you or should you give the results of your own experiments over those of other people? On the one hand, your own should carry more weight, since you know exactly how they were done... On the other hand, science is necessarily a collective enterprise... So I couldn't use my own failures as justifiable evidence that psi does not exist. I had to consider everyone else's success.
I asked myself a thousand times, as I ask the reader now: is there a right conclusion?
The only answer I can give, after ten years of intensive research in parapsychology, is that I don't know. (Blackmore, 1989a, p.74)
Don't you see how conflicted she is? It's no wonder she experiences cognitive dissonance!