Why People Resist Verifiable Factual Truth: Beyond Ego

The reluctance to accept verifiable factual truths is a multifaceted issue that transcends simple matters of ego. It involves psychological, social, and cognitive factors that can significantly influence how individuals perceive and engage with information. In this article, we explore the complex reasons behind this resistance.

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance occurs when new information contradicts existing beliefs, leading to discomfort. To alleviate this, individuals often reject the new information or rationalize it to maintain their worldview. For example, if someone holds a strongly rooted belief, and new evidence challenges it, they might dismiss the evidence or reinterpret it to fit their pre-existing views. This behavior is not solely attributable to ego; it’s a defense mechanism used to preserve mental stability and coherence.

Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is another significant factor. People tend to seek out and prioritize information that aligns with their preexisting beliefs while ignoring or rationalizing contradictory evidence. This bias can lead to a distorted perception of reality. Studies have shown that people are more likely to believe information that supports their existing beliefs, even when that information contradicts well-established scientific evidence.

Identity and Belonging

Beliefs often play a crucial role in one's identity and sense of belonging. For many, accepting certain facts can feel like a betrayal of their community or personal identity, leading to resistance. Group identity and social dynamics can reinforce beliefs, making it difficult for individuals to change their stance. This phenomenon is observed in various contexts, from political affiliations to cultural identities.

Misinformation and Trust

In an age of abundant misinformation, trust in sources of factual information has diminished. Many individuals view certain sources as biased or unreliable, leading to skepticism about verifiable truths. Past experiences and broader societal narratives can exacerbate this distrust, making people more likely to reject or question verifiable information.

Emotional Investment

Strong emotional ties to beliefs can make it challenging to accept contradictory facts. Emotions play a significant role in decision-making and belief formation. When confronted with verifiable information that challenges deeply held emotions and beliefs, individuals may experience resistance and rejection. The emotional aspects of belief formation ensure that people are more likely to defend their existing views rather than readily accept new facts.

Fear of Change

Accepting new truths often implies a need for change, which can be anxiety-inducing. Some individuals may resist verifiable information to avoid the discomfort and anxiety associated with change. The fear of change can become a significant barrier to accepting factual truths, especially when the change required is significant or involves fundamental beliefs.

In summary, while ego can play a role, the issue is often more complex. It involves a mix of psychological defenses, social dynamics, and cognitive biases. Understanding these factors can help in addressing why some people resist accepting verifiable factual truths. As we navigate an era of abundant information, it is crucial to recognize these nuances and promote a more nuanced and empathetic approach to education and public discourse.

It is important to note that verifiable does not necessarily mean verified. Verification is often difficult or even impossible in practice, and practical verification is an approximation rather than an absolute. Many truths we accept today are based on the best available evidence and reliable sources, even if complete verification is not always feasible.

As Stanislaw Lem’s novel, Ananke, illustrates, a meticulous pursuit of absolute verification can lead to paralysis and failure to act in the real world. In reality, we often settle for 'good enough' approaches that are practical and effective in the context of our goals.

The world of analog is one where we deal with approximations rather than absolute truths. The very definition of 'verifiable' often means testable and falsifiable, but not necessarily fully confirmed. Thus, while striving for accuracy, we must also recognize the limitations inherent in practical verification processes.