Hi RAZD, I like you, I'll be honest: I didn't read a bit of that colorful shit above this, besides the opening line before the quote.
I clicked the link to your message and skipped that and read the one you replied to from BD*, Message 368, where he says:
quote:I think you have your own cognitive dissonance. Its an easy charge to make isn't it?
*I also just read the last, like, 5 posts from BD.
And I agree that that's an easy charge to make (the way its thrown around cheapens it). So, past that quote and on to the meat:
The reason, or a major reason imho, for both this resistance AND why there is a "creationist shortage" on this forum is because one of the ways to reduce dissonance is to retreat to a place of comfort where you are surrounded by people with the same confirmation bias and beliefs -- the creationist sites and forums that welcome them and give them a sense of belonging.
I don't think you're accurately portraying him at all. Judging from those posts of his, he doesn't seem lack the mental capability to resort to such menial tactics. I think he's just having a way with you's.
Re: Cognitive dissonance and blind spots and authoritarianism
This leads to blind spots in thinking and making conclusions, confirmation bias, inconsistent or invalid application of logic, etc (ie special pleading, straw-man arguments, ad hominems, repetition of bad arguments and the like).
But how do you know they're being honest? Maybe they're just trolling you...
It be really easy to declare every Poe as a sufferer of cognitive dissonance... but you'd be wrong.
How are you ruling that out so that you know you're really looking at a case of CD and therefore obtaining an accurate prediction?
Re: revisiting old arguments again? is that not a sign of dissonance?
Again, everyone is "suffering" -- subject to cognitive dissonance -- it is unavoidable because no two minds are alike. The question is one of degree.
So, how do you tell how much CD a poster on an internet forum is subject to?
You're using their behavior ("blind spots in thinking and making conclusions, confirmation bias, inconsistent or invalid application of logic, etc (ie special pleading, straw-man arguments, ad hominems, repetition of bad arguments and the like)"), but it would be really easy to stage those behaviors while not being subjected to any CD at all.
So how do you know when its genuine behavior or not?