What Is The Apologetic For Cognitive Dissonance?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
bluegreenearth
Guru
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
Location: Manassas, VA
Has thanked: 983 times
Been thanked: 657 times

What Is The Apologetic For Cognitive Dissonance?

Post #1

Post by bluegreenearth »

From Wikipedia -
In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values, or participates in an action that goes against one of these three, and experiences psychological stress because of that. According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent. The discomfort is triggered by the person's belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein they try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.

In A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957), Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency to function mentally in the real world. A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance. They tend to make changes to justify the stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance or by avoiding circumstances and contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance.

Coping with the nuances of contradictory ideas or experiences is mentally stressful. It requires energy and effort to sit with those seemingly opposite things that all seem true. Festinger argued that some people would inevitably resolve dissonance by blindly believing whatever they wanted to believe.
According to Christian theology, God desires for people to make the freewill decision to believe he exists and be in a loving relationship with him. Once people freely choose to accept Christ as their one true Lord and savior, the Holy Spirit is claimed to descend upon them to reveal the truth of Christianity in such a way that it is undeniable. Consequently, we would expect cognitive dissonance to never occur in Christians if their sincere belief is true. Nevertheless, one of the primary functions of apologetics is help Christians suppress the cognitive dissonance they routinely experience.

Once the truth of Christianity is divinely revealed to people by the Holy Spirit, it should be impossible for these Christians to hold two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. After all, their freewill choice to trust the word of God and acknowledge Jesus's sacrifice for their sins will have satisfied God's criteria for granting them the gift of salvation. As such, we expect there should be no theological purpose for God not to insulate his true Christian followers from experiencing cognitive dissonance now that he has assured their place in his kingdom.

At the very least, if Christianity is true, any secular beliefs that would seem to contradict Biblical beliefs should not be more compelling to a true Christian. However, the fact that Christians routinely experience cognitive dissonance demonstrates that the secular beliefs are often more persuasive than the Biblical beliefs they seem to contradict. Otherwise, we would expect an inability for those secular beliefs to routinely elicit experiences of cognitive dissonance in true Christians.

So, what are the apologetic arguments for why apologetics is needed to help true Christians suppress the cognitive dissonance they routinely experience given the aforementioned considerations? Why does apologetics not become obsolete after people become true Christians, but instead, it remains an essential tool for suppressing the cognitive dissonance they routinely experience?

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 4156
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 4485 times
Been thanked: 2653 times

Post #51

Post by Difflugia »

Thomas123 wrote:This is Plato's cave with lava lamps installed.
What does this even mean? I've been trying since the beginning of the thread to figure out what is behind your point, but I feel like I'm trying to have a conversation with a bag of fortune cookies.

Plato's cave already has flickering firelight. What we see on the cave wall is a distorted projection of the Platonic ideal. Plato's cave is allegorical, but in his view, it's an allegory of the relationship between specific, necessarily flawed instances of real things and the Platonic ideals from which they're projected. How does your new allegory involving a lava lamp differ from the original with its flickering firelight?
Thomas123 wrote:Atheists and theists, agnostics, philosophers, scientists, and whoever, need a consensus of appreciation on reality.
This is another broad, sweeping aphorism. Your arguments are beginning to look like a psychic's cold readings. They seem lofty and meaningful, but are too vague to pin down. Rather than telling us something about your argument, you're leading us to fill in the blanks with our own projections of what your argument might be about.

About what specifically do you think nontheists lack consensus and need to agree?
Thomas123 wrote:In the prophetic words of the Jesus figure ...
Matthew12 : 25
And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
"The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." " A fortune cookie.
Thomas123 wrote:To suggest that atheism has been a source of reflective correction for theism ,defies bewilderment.
I haven't really noticed much of anything triggering reflective correction in theists, so it might be unfair to single out atheism as being ineffective.
Thomas123 wrote:It is a scam vaccine, imho.
Seeing it as a vaccine is the wrong way to look at it. Atheism isn't a vaccine, but is the state of not being sick.
Thomas123 wrote:The unknown is not to be trifled with.
"You will receive an unexpected compliment from a coworker."
Thomas123 wrote:As stated previously, we are a moth to this cosmic flame,and selective amnesia of this things scale will destroy us.
"I'm getting a message from the other side... something to do with flowers and a clock..."
Thomas123 wrote:Stick or twist! Make an atheistic ,rational case for not twisting. Acknowledge the human position and it's inherent precariousness within your logic!
"Groop I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes!"

Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post #52

Post by Thomas123 »

"The complete irresponsibility of man for his actions and his nature is the bitterest drop which he who understands must swallow."
Nietzsche

Post 36 Thomas123
Let us all get a grip here!
This is Plato's cave with lava lamps installed. Atheists and theists, agnostics, philosophers, scientists, and whoever, need a consensus of appreciation on reality.

Platos Cave wiki

"In other words, we would encounter another "realm", a place incomprehensible because, theoretically, it is the source of a higher reality than the one we have always known; it is the realm of pure Form, pure fact."
............
These installed lava lamps are the vessels of entrenched thought . Their kaleidoscope of mismessages obscures beyond recognition any attempt at reality perception and encourage folly in the simple primate. Imho

Please consider and explore the fortune cookie further, Difflugia. The unfortunate inmates of the cave were unable to turn round or feel or hear the fire...how did that work! My common sense is my ball and chain.
Thank You.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8739
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2279 times
Been thanked: 2408 times

Post #53

Post by Tcg »

Thomas123 wrote:
Post 35 Tcg
I can't think of any. Do you have a reason to think there would be?
It's nice that you quoted my complete response this time, including the question I asked. What is missing is your answer. Perhaps you'd care to address it. It was asked in response to this post:
Thomas123 wrote: 1.Extraordinary evidence requires extraordinary claims.
2.Transcending Proof

If we apply these two to this,


"All in all, Hubble reveals an estimated 100 billion galaxies in the universe or so, but this number is likely to increase to about 200 billion as telescope technology in space improves,"


What issues appear for the atheistic position?

Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post #54

Post by Thomas123 »

Tcg: What issues appear for the atheistic position?

I have stated that newly acquired knowledge can be our nemesis.

Consider the original point regarding atheistic reasoning, which I consider to be flawed,and requiring constant reassurance.

marco: Currently offers a consideration of the Incarnation for open discussion, on this sub forum. If I reply that this event is the result of a direct portal transference to ,and from, the stars of Orions belt. Will you ask me to prove it? Will you show me the transfer schedule for that day that proves there was none. How will you proceed with atheistic enquiry against theistic forms without a conclusive defined position on Space and the implications of its vastness.
You stated that you have no such issues and will proceed within the anti God of the one placed before you. We need to define the ridiculous, more accurately with a view to it's removal. A common sense approach that is consensual.
Atheists have serious issues to address before they become a contribution imho

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8739
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2279 times
Been thanked: 2408 times

Post #55

Post by Tcg »

Thomas123 wrote: Tcg: What issues appear for the atheistic position?

I have stated that newly acquired knowledge can be our nemesis.
Simply stating this does not demonstrate it is true.

Consider the original point regarding atheistic reasoning, which I consider to be flawed,and requiring constant reassurance.
An interesting opinion and nothing more. I don't see how this answers my question.

Atheists have serious issues to address before they become a contribution imho
Another unsupported opinion that doesn't address my question.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post #56

Post by Thomas123 »

You conveniently skipped the nub of my submission, Tcg. There is hardly any point to proceeding like this...address the marco incarnation thread issue with an honest answer, or leave it to others.

marco, currently offers a consideration of the Incarnation for open discussion, on this sub forum. If I reply that this event is the result of a direct portal transference to ,and from, the stars of Orions belt. Will you ask me to prove it? Will you show me the transfer schedule for that day that proves there was none. How will you proceed with atheistic enquiry against theistic forms without a conclusive defined position on Space and the implications of its vastness.
You stated that you have no such issues and will proceed within the anti God of the one placed before you. We need to define the ridiculous, more accurately with a view to it's removal. A common sense approach that is consensual.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8739
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2279 times
Been thanked: 2408 times

Post #57

Post by Tcg »

Thomas123 wrote: You conveniently skipped the nub of my submission, Tcg. There is hardly any point to proceeding like this...address the marco incarnation thread issue with an honest answer, or leave it to others.
Are you suggesting that you can't answer my question unless I respond to marco's thread?

marco, currently offers a consideration of the Incarnation for open discussion, on this sub forum. If I reply that this event is the result of a direct portal transference to ,and from, the stars of Orions belt. Will you ask me to prove it? Will you show me the transfer schedule for that day that proves there was none.
I haven't asked anything about marco's thread. I asked you about your post.

How will you proceed with atheistic enquiry against theistic forms without a conclusive defined position on Space and the implications of its vastness.
I haven't started an "atheistic enquiry against theistic forms." I couldn't possibly proceed with that which I haven't started.

You stated that you have no such issues and will proceed within the anti God of the one placed before you.
Where did I state this?

We need to define the ridiculous, more accurately with a view to it's removal. A common sense approach that is consensual.
We need to do this before you can answer my question?


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post #58

Post by Thomas123 »

I am on Socrates's wall at the moment trying to work out the geography of the cave.
Thank You, Difflugia, Thanks a lot!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave

Wiki
"Plato, however, indicates that the fire is also the political doctrine that is taught in a nation state. The artists use light and shadows to teach the dominant doctrines of a time and place."

Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post #59

Post by Thomas123 »

My general impression of conversing with atheistic viewpoints is that they display a furtive hesitancy to produce real ideas of their own. This contrasts greatly with the fervour they display when pack hunting the isolated theist.

I presented a benign challenge for them to offer considerations regarding the implications of new photographic evidence of a limitless cosmos and the false front of feigned curiosity in my temerity has been hastily erected.

Why not just, go for it ,and give us what you've got!

I said "Stick or Twist", in jest , not realising that this was in fact a card game!

The atheistic dilemma here is that either way
A. To deadpan in question to question, ping pong
B. To go out on a speculative limb

......both ways would have them acceding to a theistic request for answers that they just might not have.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8739
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2279 times
Been thanked: 2408 times

Post #60

Post by Tcg »

Thomas123 wrote:
I presented a benign challenge for them to offer considerations regarding the implications of new photographic evidence of a limitless cosmos and the false front of feigned curiosity in my temerity has been hastily erected.
Why don't you get the ball rolling by explaining what implications you think "new photographic evidence of a limitless cosmos" have on the belief or lack of belief in god/gods. Of course if you think this only applies to one select God, you can also explain why you think we can ignore all the other gods humans have developed belief in.

Rest assured that this request is no feigned curiosity. I am genuinely interested in why you think "new photographic evidence of a limitless cosmos" relates in any way to the discussion of god/gods or God if you have a favorite in mind.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Post Reply