Who is more likely to believe something without adequate grounds?

[HELLSTAR_trek]

012 345 678

[Starr]

Wanting or feeling some kind of need to believe in something is also going to be an important factor, especially when it comes to being able to dismiss opposing information without much thought.

[HELLSTAR_trek]

Wanting or feeling some kind of need to believe in something is also going to be an important factor, especially when it comes to being able to dismiss opposing information without much thought.
The option you mention occurred to me and I deliberately refrained from including it as an option in the poll. Perhaps that was a mistake, but I currently see no particular reason to think that it was a mistake.

Dismissing opposing information without much thought does not necessarily indicate actual belief.
Consider how a person responds to
(A) Some very strong evidence of one particular thing that is radically opposed to his or her beliefs; or
(B) Some very strong evidence of one particular thing that is in serious conflict with what he or she strongly wants the truth to be.

For (A), I would expect a response of surprise, confusion, and a desire for more information. For (B), I would expect anger and evasion.

Believing something and wanting something to be true are two entirely different things. Suppose we're talking about something very strong. It is either a very strong belief in a statement or a very strong desire for the statement to be true. Do Iranian government officials strongly believe that the sum of two odd numbers is an even number and that the sum of an odd number and an even number is odd -- or are they confused and not quite sure about such an elementary matter? Do you think that Iranian government officials would mercilessly persecute some group of people who claim that the sum of two odd numbers is sometimes odd? I think they would simply ridicule them. Now consider how adherents of Baha'i have been treated by the Iranian government.

When it comes to questions about addition of whole numbers and the categories even and odd, we are talking about matters of belief. When it comes to Islam versus Baha'i, we are talking about -- excluding any hypothetical witnesses of actual miraculous events associated with Islam or Baha'i -- what people want the truth to be.

[SlagMaster]

Who is more likely to believe something without adequate grounds?

Anyone that believes what is force feed from the T.V.

[Cyprian]

I think negligence is the main factor. Real self-deception is a problem, but I don't think it's as common or as significant as not bothering to really think about the question at all, in which case you'll merely plop for the first prejudice that pleases you.

[HELLSTAR_trek]

I'm bumping this thread because the issue remains important and more people should participate in the poll.

[New Scientist]

The answer options arent sufficient. For example laziness is a major factor in male thinking or lack of it. How many men for example will admit that they just go along with the crowd, because its easier than thinking about it. Even though they really know its a crock of shrit.

With most men struggling to make a living, find sexual satisfaction, stave off boredom, deal with low level stress and all the routine maintenance of everyday life its no surprise.

This isnt really belief i suppose, but its important in understanding why a lot of people submerge themselves to a group who do believe.

[kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman]

All of the above would be the answer.

The stupid person may not intend to be the way he is, whereas the ignorant person does.

I think "many of the VNN posters" should be an option in this poll.

[Mike]

I think the best of the given options is "a person who engages in self-deception". Stupid and sloppy thinkers are at least amenable to correction, whereas self-deception is often accompanied by stubborn resistance.

There are of course additional causes like upbringing, wishful thinking, deference to authority, etc. that could have been considered as distinct options.

[Kodos]

Engaging in the self deception that I can answer this accurately on my own without empirical evidence, I picked the self deception one.

[Starr]

I think the best of the given options is "a person who engages in self-deception". Stupid and sloppy thinkers are at least amenable to correction, whereas self-deception is often accompanied by stubborn resistance.

There are of course additional causes like upbringing, wishful thinking, deference to authority, etc. that could have been considered as distinct options.


A person who engages in self deception can be forced out of that trap by being struck by a strong blow in the face with reality. Of course, that is only going to possibly work when they have no choice but to look at reality. A stupid person on the other hand, might be incapable of truly seeing and understanding reality and therefore will always believe what they are told to believe whether there are adequate grounds for the belief or not.