Tolerance for Cognitive Dissonance

[echoesacrosstheether]

People often, IME, cite Cognitive Dissonance as a bad thing. As in it's bad to experience it. Whilst it doesn't feel pleasant I think it's necessary to have some tolerance for it. Otherwise new ideas which conflict with one's own would either be dismissed out of hand or wholly accepted too readily. When what might be better is having the ability to retain those two apparently conflicting ideas as being both true and seeing if context plays a part over which truth applies.

This, I think, has a relevance in spiritual and philosophical matters because people will knock a spiritual belief or philosophical world view just because it does not seem wholly consistent to them. Yet, they don't view the context whereby it might be applied.

I was wondering whether people agree.

What a great question and definitely worth exploring

One of my favourite quotes is from F. Scott Fitzgerald

“The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and retain the ability to function.”

I think that the modern world view is largely built in applying a layman’s scientific theory to everything, even where the scientific model has not been developed to map the issue at hand like religion. I think many find comfort in the idea of if x exists then y exists. Humans love patterns because a pattern equals predictability equals better chance of survival.

where circumstances leave us holding too seemingly (and I’ll return to seemingly) conflicting views then live becomes less predictable and that is what makes cognitive dissonance so uncomfortable. We expect life to happen in a series of coherent causes and effects all pulling us towards our goals. And this is where we fall apart, our preconceived goals. We apply logic and it fails because logic only allows for certain outcomes, life is illogical because it’s by and large not replicacable.

We think that every time we do x Y should happen and if someone else does A and B happens we should get B if we also do A.

Cognitive dissonance is our friend here it allows us to try different angles. It prevents us for being one trick ponies, it allows us to keep an open mind. It allows us to be flexible.

I said seemingly conflicting views, but the fact that they appear to conflict is predicated on a preconceived notion.

Asking whether a cat is dead or alive in a box is predicated on our preconceived notions of something has to be dead OR alive. Is light a wave or particle again the OR suggests you have to make a choice. Of course we now know it’s both and will only be one or the other when observed.

We create disorder and seemingly Cognitive dissonance because of our own intervention, through our need to categorise and describe. It is a man made invention.

so how does this apply to spirituality? If we take the concept of a judaeo- Christian God for example. People will think God is good and kind (a presupposition), therefore if something happens or a scripture does not accord with this it creates conflict because x hasn’t led to Y (going to continue in next post)

People will tie themselves in knots to explain the seeming cognitive dissonance “God Works in mysterious ways” “Free Will” etc. because it doesn’t all “stack up” based on a predication it’s easy to pull apart, eg God can’t exist (he’s supposed to have power over everything and be good) and that child has cancer. People are using cause and effect logic, but giving very little thought to whether what they think is the cause is correct. Believing in a good omnipotent god and witnessing childhood cancer will undoubtably cause cognitive dissonance. People scramble to reconcile the irreconcilable. Back to the God works in mysterious ways. Others see a flaw in this and lose faith

what most fail to do is examine the presupposition that God is good. If God is everything, he is good and evil, he is also Satan, because he omnipresent he is everywhere inc in evil. Suddenly the old and New Testament don’t conflict, we don’t need to create demiurges. God is light, a wave and particle, good and evil it’s only with human observation we make him one or the other.

Once we drop the either/or gateway of cognition and accept everything can be all things at once we lose the need for cognitive dissonance because nothing conflicts, the source of or thoughts holds all potentialities we realise by simply observing one or two it doesn’t mean that there’s a conflict anywhere it’s just two direct perspectives of the same point.

sorry I’ve rambled was typing as I was was attempting (prob poorly) to think this through.

what do you think?

A lot there to think on @OMG12

One thing that struck me is this:

"what most fail to do is examine the presupposition that God is good. If God is everything, he is good and evil, he is also Satan, because he omnipresent he is everywhere inc in evil. Suddenly the old and New Testament don’t conflict, we don’t need to create demiurges. God is light, a wave and particle, good and evil it’s only with human observation we make him one or the other."

Now I do believe that God is good but that good has a range of actions appropriate to different contexts more varied and wider ranging than we can easily predict or understand. An all seeing, all knowing being inevitably will have different priorities to us from our unique, individual and narrow perspectives. Which, I think, sort of fits with the God is everything idea too but I cannot quite grasp how or verbalise this yet...

Ah, yes. When what we view as good is from our own frame of reference God can be everything taking into consideration everyone's frame of reference.

Yes that’s very true, I was perhaps lazy using good and evil because that, of course, is based in the presupposition that good and evil exist, again they only exist on observation and is, at that point, tied into the metaphysics of the observer.

Theres a great part in Blake’s Marriage of Heaven and Hell - A memorable fancy which addresses that very point (from memory its the third or fourth) where an Angel takes a protagonist to sit overlooking the abyss of hell. Whilst the Angel was there they observed the burning Abyss with monsters and smoke, yet as soon as the Angel disappeared our protagonist was suddenly on a beautiful riverbank. He escaped Hell. When the Angel asked him how he had escaped he said “All that we saw was owing to your metaphysics….” (Personally I think the writer of the show Lucifer nicked this😊).

in short, there can never be any actual conflict only that which we perceive due to our own metaphysics. God/tge Source/tge All is perfect and whole - no conflict can ever exist from that perspective it’s only when we try and mould Gods will to our own that issues arise because we are no longer aligned with God.

"in short, there can never be any actual conflict only that which we perceive due to our own metaphysics. God/tge Source/tge All is perfect and whole - no conflict can ever exist from that perspective it’s only when we try and mould Gods will to our own that issues arise because we are no longer aligned with God."

Yes, that's a good way of putting it. 🙂

Hmm I had a thought but it will sound like a primary school text in comparison with what's gone before

I reflected very personally that I rather hold all things in the possible category, and use whatever seems to work best in the moment/context I'm experiencing.

Generally, I need no opinion on ghosts. On occasion I see something that no other framework seems to explain. I don't spin in panic, I pop it in the 'that's weird' box. If it seems malevolent and to need dealing with, I raid my 'watched a few spooky movies' box and bring out the Lord's Prayer and holy water.

That all sounds a bit dramatic. I just find that flexibility of outlook is helpful. I reframe things until they are manageable. I am constantly surprised by people telling me what I believe, when they've never asked me. Or telling me what I've seen/experienced when they weren't there.

That does make sense@picklemewalnuts.

Regarding hauntings I think how in the biological sense everything interacts right down to the microscopic level. I view it all as sentient and with a memory of a kind - although not necessarily as everyone would understand sentience and memory. So it is no surprise to me that the environment or memory can have the potential to affect our current experience. Regarding malevolence if we find it is 'taking us over' and we are obsessing on it, yes, absolutely scripture can reframe our focus. 🙂

"I am constantly surprised by people telling me what I believe, when they've never asked me. Or telling me what I've seen/experienced when they weren't there."

That would seem odd to me too. Do you feel they are accurate?

Sorry I tend to ramble and brain dump😊.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head re the purpose of cognitive dissonance - it allows you to keep an open mind, if you were suddenly faced with irrefutable evidence that ghost exist it wouldn’t cause mental breakdown because your mind is open to the possibility. But the more possibilities you have the less certainty.

it makes people uncomfortable- they want to know which side of the bread you butter to ascertain whether you’re friend or foe. In absence of you giving a definitive answer they will just give you one!

Try get into a heated discussion with someone (try AIBU) then change what you’re saying half way through to the complete opposite argument- 9 times out of 10 no one will notice because they have already formulated what they think you believe.

I

They’re interesting thoughts about haunting. I was reading and discussing a book last night - “How to read the aura” by w e Butler. There was a section on how everything, even the mineral world has an aura and each aura could be absorbed into another if it wasn’t well protected or if there was surplus vitality.

it got me wondering if this is what haunting were, an awareness of the remnants of a foreign aura which was being held by a person or building.

still open for discussion- musings in my mind.

anyway, I digress, as is my habit -blame the adhd😀

"But the more possibilities you have the less certainty."

"it makes people uncomfortable- they want to know which side of the bread you butter to ascertain whether you’re friend or foe. In absence of you giving a definitive answer they will just give you one!"

@OMG12, that makes me think of the Ellsberg Paradox. When I first discovered it I was pretty overjoyed because I had a validation in maths/science for embracing uncertainty. It's partly why I love faith, it's the hope it offers. Unfortunately people often seem to find hope offensive.

"They’re interesting thoughts about haunting. I was reading and discussing a book last night - “How to read the aura” by w e Butler. There was a section on how everything, even the mineral world has an aura and each aura could be absorbed into another if it wasn’t well protected or if there was surplus vitality."

Two of my favourite books are 'Woodlands' by Oliver Rackham and 'Entangled Life' by Merlin Sheldrake. There you can see a perfect illustration of how interlinked nature is. There is so much symbiosis between species it's difficult to see where one species begins and another ends sometimes. And the age of some of these things...

Really gets me thinking. And then in the Bible when it says

Luke 19:40
And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

There's something amazing about forests. Apparently there are ancestor trees. They influence which saplings will thrive and which won't. There are networks of mycelium connecting everything. Resources are allocated and some plants sacrificed to save resources for others. It's a complex, active process. It's extraordinary.

And all that has been happening beneath our noses while we were oblivious to it.

Disclaimer, I have an appalling memory and have probably got lots of details wrong.

We just know so little about our world, and yet are so dogmatically confident.

Yes, @picklemewalnuts, I agree. The books I mentioned talk about these things. I have more on similar subjects but they're not handy for me to copy down the titles. I love reading about forests. 🙂

It’s interesting, tge book I mentioned also talks about the power of trees esp fir trees to recharge your depleted vitality. There is something magical about trees, think how often the feature in mythology -usually as a source, a sustainer snd indeed a map of existence. The Son of god begs in his process of death and rebirth on a tree. It’s a reflection of on earth (it’s roots) as it is in heaven (it’s branches)

just to sit underneath a tree and exchange your breath with its breath.,

im a Pantheist maybe a panentheist - everything in the universe is an emanation of God.

That perhaps describes me too. I use Christianity as my framework. However it's a man scribed framework so clearly flawed. I don't consider any element of it to be infallible. If you execute people who disagree with you, how can you reach truth?

Through a mirror, darkly and all that.

@OMG12,

'im a Pantheist maybe a panentheist - everything in the universe is an emanation of God.'

I often think about the themes of unity within Christianity and how this works (or doesn't) in the natural world. 🙂

'If you execute people who disagree with you, how can you reach truth?'

@picklemewalnuts, indeed. How can we have diversity without accepting difference? How can we have unity if it is forced?

People often talk about obedience. But is it obedience if you want the same things, share the same desires? Surely this is the freedom in true unity.

And if you want a harmonious kind of unity where there is diversity you have to be able to deal with some degree of cognitive dissonance...😁

I think if you look at the bible (and other non-canonical texts from a different perspective it’s easy to see it all fitting together. It’s just another retelling of the same story. It’s very much about the divinity of man as much as the god becoming man.

In the beginning was the word and the word was with God snd the word was God. The Word is man (recognised through Jesus)

'I think if you look at the bible (and other non-canonical texts from a different perspective it’s easy to see it all fitting together. It’s just another retelling of the same story. It’s very much about the divinity of man as much as the god becoming man.'

@OMG12
I can see that in terms of how we can join with Christ, be in Christ just as He is in God. There is a sameness there.

Which gets me to thinking of how language is intrinsic to how many of us view the world and seen as definitive of human beings. (Daniel Everett's work with the Piraha people is an interesting thought provoking contrast to this).

But also my current YouTube wormhole which is animals which have been taught to use speech buttons...😁

My conception of God is a human projection of what is good in humans and the devil is a human projection of what is evil in humanity.

We are all fundamentally and deeply connected and that experience means we need to see ourselves and the others we surround ourselves with as being “good” people or else we would have to deal with the reality people are neither good nor bad but are easily capable of both. It is largely circumstances and upbringing that brings the “bad” human behaviour.

That is really the ultimate in cognitive dissonance fully knowing that just by virtue of being a human being with all of the capacity for good and bad that all people have, the people you love including yourself can do really bad things. That is very unnerving to live with.