Understanding Cognitive dissonance

The human brain is capable of simultaneously upholding contradictory conclusions. Usually, one of the conclusions is more “preferred” and so the brain seeks for and validates evidence to support this preferred conclusion; meanwhile it does not seek for and even invalidates data that threatens this preferred conclusion. This phenomenon is called “motivated reasoning”, it is a well-documented phenomenon.

Sometimes the evidence for a non-preferred conclusion is so compelling that our brain has a difficult time invalidating or ignoring it. Our brain becomes exhausted trying to make come up with ways to invalidate or ignore the evidence. This is particularly difficult when the repercussions of the non-preferred conclusion are particularly severe or when the non-preferred conclusion logically drives us to change our behaviors.

Rejecting compelling evidence which supports a non-preferred conclusion OR accepting non-compelling evidence which supports a preferred conclusion requires some mental gymnastics which can be both uncomfortable and exhausting. This mentally uncomfortable condition has been termed “cognitive dissonance” and it can result in mental exhaustion, depression, stress, and anxiety.

Here is a situation that illustrates how cognitive dissonance might occur:

You are looking for a good place to plant your farm. You find that the most fertile place is at the base of what some claim to be an active volcano. You are warned that the volcano is due to erupt at any time. You also know that you can become very wealthy from the massive crops that would come from this most fertile ground.

Conclusion 1: If you are farming beneath a volcano and that might be dangerous. The fact that the ground is so fertile might be evidence that this is an active volcano. Part of you feels that no amount of wealth or delicious food is worth risking your life and the lives of your family.

Conclusion 2: The volcano might not be an active volcano. You have no proof that this is an active volcano or that it is ever going to erupt, and even if it does erupt—it might be 1000 years from now. Why should you throw away all of the delicious food and money that could be gained because it “might” be dangerous?

Cognitive dissonance from conclusion 1: Almost every moment of every day you have a nagging worry at the back of your mind that the volcano is going to erupt. You fear for the safety of your children. Each time there is a loud bang, you startle—thinking for a moment that it is the volcano erupting. Each time you eat a delicious grape from your vineyard you feel guilt that you are pleasing your palate at the potential expense of your children’s lives. You try to convince yourself that these are stupid thoughts. At the back of your mind is a place where you live in continual guilt and stress for your decision. Whenever someone comes and claims that the volcano is active you try to write them off as a “dooms-day lunatic” and use as many evidences (or lack of evidences) as you can think of to prove them wrong. You say that as soon you see smoke or lava—you will move. You only hang out with friends who also farm at the base of the volcano because you feel like others are judging you as harshly as you are judging yourself. You all enjoy the delicious food and talk about how stupid everyone is for their irrational fears. Some farmers dig up really old burned bodies covered in black soil—you convince yourself that they were probably burned by some other means besides volcanic ash eruption, and figure that either way, it’s not likely to erupt again any time soon anyways. But always at the back of your mind you know that since you live beneath the volcano—your children and descendants are likely to do the same, and some day, there may be a reckoning for your decision and how it influenced your descendants and it may (doubtfully) result in so many of them being killed. Is living off of a doubt worth definitely ruining your life? You decide not.

Cognitive dissonance from conclusion 2: You can barely carve out a living farming on barren land. Your wife and children wear shabby clothes and live in a tiny shabby house. Sometimes your kids complain because they are hungry for better tasting food. Your children aren’t able to go to a nice college and people accuse you of being “superstitious and fear-based”. Every time you look up at the mountain you imagine what your life could be like if you would just go and farm there. Every poverty stricken year that passes without an eruption, you hate yourself for subjecting your children and wife to live in relative squalor. The very fact that you are alive is evidence that you made the wrong choice by not farming at the base of the volcano. You occasionally visit with those who living beneath the volcano and see their wealth, their parties—you fear that they mock you behind your back and judge you, so you avoid them. Some of your family members and friends let go of their fear and go up to the volcano to enjoy the bounty of its fertile ground. They shake their head at you for being so gullible and fearful. They tell you how glad they are that they finally let go of their fear and started enjoying life for what it can really be. You try to convince yourself that if you don’t live below the volcano that this is a good decision because it is less likely that your children and descendants will live below the volcano which may someday preserve your descendant’s lives even if it doesn’t do anything to preserve yours. Is any amount of wealth from living below a potential volcano worth possibly losing your life? You decide not.

Here is how conclusion 1 may try to reduce his cognitive dissonance:

1). Change the behavior or the cognition:

I will move away from the volcano.

2). Justify the behavior or the cognition:

A short rich life is better than a long miserably poor life. Risk is the price of success. It’s worth it.

3). Justify the behavior or the cognition by adding new cognitions:

Volcanoes don’t erupt very often, I’ll probably be safe. This volcano may never erupt. If the volcano does erupt, it might be a slow eruption and I will have time to escape. Living below a volcano is no more dangerous than riding a horse or eating chicken because you could always fall and die off of a horse or choke on a chicken bone. “How about you go live in a padded room—maybe you will be safer there”.

4). Ignore or deny information that conflicts with your conclusion:

The superstitions about people living here a long time ago being melted by lava is ridiculous because there are people who say that no such people ever existed here and I have never seen any evidence of them. The evidence that this is a dangerous volcano is being exaggerated. Some volcanoes smoke but never erupt. Some hot springs are not always associated with active volcanoes. History is so unreliable anyways—its wrong more often than right. Geologists really don’t know what they are talking about, the field is constantly changing and it is unreliable. The people who think this is a volcano are probably all wacky and paranoid—they have other ideas that are obviously silly and false.

Here is how conclusion 2 may try to reduce cognitive dissonance:

1). Change the behavior or the cognition:

I will go farm the fertile ground below what some people think is an active volcano.

2). Justify the behavior or the cognition:

Life is better than wealth. Family is more important than money. I’d rather be alive than more comfortable. I’m plenty happy with what I have right now, I don’t want to need anything more than what I have. I like living away from the volcano because its more open feeling. The people living away from the volcano are more down to earth and friendly. I don’t want my kids to grow up all rich and snobby. Even if the volcano never erupted, just the constant stress that it might would cause me so much stress that the wealth wouldn’t be worth the extra money.

3). Justify the behavior or the cognition by adding new cognitions:

Every volcano erupts eventually. By living here I am choosing to exterminate myself or my future descendants. If the volcano does erupt, I would likely have no time to escape. Living below a volcano is way more dangerous to be worth the benefits.

4). Ignore or deny information that conflicts with your conclusion:

Those people aren’t really that happy, they are actually stressed out but hide it. Other farming grounds are plenty good for farming.

So how does the story end? Does the volcano erupt and kill all the rich people living at its base before they had time to flee? Is the volcano actually just a mountain and all of the people who lived by it forever die of old age like everyone else? If we knew the answer there would be no cognitive dissonance.