Facts vs. Emotions What Does Our Brain Listen To?

It is a common misconception to think that facts are the only thing that can change our minds. In reality, it is emotions and beliefs that hold more power over us. When it comes to their beliefs, people are typically irrational. This is due to the propensity of people to look for information that supports their preexisting ideas and beliefs. We have been told and it is believed by most, that the best way to influence people's opinions is through facts. However, it turns out that facts don't influence people's opinions. In fact, they frequently help them solidify their initial beliefs.

The culprit behind this phenomenon is a cognitive bias known as confirmation bias. It compels us to gravitate towards information that reinforces our existing beliefs, while simultaneously erecting mental barriers against anything that deviates from our established narrative. This explains the perplexing spectacle of individuals, presented with the same set of facts, drawing diametrically opposed conclusions. Confirmation bias warps our perception, creating a distorted reality where evidence is interpreted through the lens of pre-conceived notions.

Further complicating the matter is the influence of social circles. We are far more likely to lend credence to a radical idea if it originates from a trusted confidante, someone we hold in high regard. Conversely, a contrarian viewpoint, however well-reasoned, emanating from someone outside our circle of trust is often dismissed out of hand. This dynamic fosters echo chambers, where like-minded individuals reinforce each other's beliefs, further solidifying their convictions. It's no wonder then that the most heated debates often transpire between those entrenched in opposing ideological camps, drowning out the possibility of genuine discourse.

Ironically, the key to unlocking new perspectives often lies not in engaging with those on the opposite end of the spectrum, but rather with those closest to us. The closer the proximity to our existing belief system, the more likely we are to entertain a dissenting opinion. This creates a ripple effect, where a single, carefully introduced seed of doubt can gradually take root and blossom into a more nuanced understanding.

However, this inherent resistance to change stems from a fundamental survival mechanism within our brains. Our cognitive apparatus is wired with a defensive system, designed to protect us from making detrimental choices. This system shields us from the potentially jarring effects of contradictory evidence, ensuring that our established beliefs, even if flawed, continue to guide our actions. This explains the frustration we encounter when attempting to change someone's mind, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Facts, in these instances, become mere fodder for the confirmation bias machine, twisted and reinterpreted to fit the pre-existing narrative. The inherent resistance to changing beliefs is a complex issue with biological and psychological roots. Studies have shown that the brain strengthens neural pathways associated with frequently held beliefs, making them more ingrained over time. Additionally, cognitive dissonance, the mental discomfort we experience when holding contradictory beliefs,motivates us to reject new information that challenges our existing worldview.

Effective communication strategies can help overcome these hurdles to some extent. Research suggests that using respectful language and acknowledging the other person's perspective can foster a more receptive environment. Focusing on common ground and presenting new information in a way that aligns with the other person's existing values can also increase the likelihood of them considering a different viewpoint.

However, it's important to maintain realistic expectations. Changing deeply held beliefs is a slow and arduous process.Some individuals may never be open to altering their views, especially if their identity or social standing is tied to those beliefs. The goal of communication, in these cases, may not be complete persuasion, but rather the planting of a seed of doubt that can germinate over time.