Latest research findings: The more believers doubt their own beliefs, the more they proselytize in favor of them .

by AndersonsInfo 30 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  AndersonsInfo

  On December 10, 2010, appearing in our local newspaper was an article titled, Social Science Palooza, written by columnist, David Brooks. He said:

  "Every day, hundreds of thousands of scholars study human behavior. Every day, a few of their studies are bundled and distributed via e-mail by Kevin Lewis, who covers the social sciences for The Boston Globe and National Affairs. And every day, I file away these studies because I find them bizarrely interesting.

  "In this column, I'm going to try to summarize as many of these studies as space allows. No single study is dispositive, but I hope these summaries can spark some conversations."

  I'm only going to quote one study found in Mr. Brooks column, the results I found fascinating which indeed should spark conversation on this discussion board.

  "Classic research has suggested that the more people doubt their own beliefs the more, paradoxically, they are inclined to proselytize in favor of them. David Gal and Derek Rucker published a study in Psychological Science in which they presented some research subjects with evidence that undermined their core convictions. The subjects who were forced to confront the counterevidence went on to more forcefully advocate their original beliefs, thus confirming the earlier findings."

  In light of this study, do you think the Witnesses who are the most vigorous in defending their religion, really doubt their beliefs?
• 

  MrFreeze

  Cognitive Dissonance at it's finest.

  It's a feeling of "I've wasted my whole life on something that's wrong, I need to do my best to justify I've been wrong.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Yup. And this isn't the first time a study has shown such a thing to be the case. Beliefs are powerful and the mind will defend them aggressively, even against the individual's best interests. When a belief is challenged from the outside, the person gets defensive and will often attack the challenger in an ad hominem way. When a belief is challenged from within a person's own thoughts, the defense is similar - attack the messenger - with heavy guilt and a blow to one's self-esteem. Aggressive behaviors in support of the belief are the mechanism that assuages the guilt and re-establishes the esteem.

  It is very difficult to believe contrary to ones actions. This is also one of the reasons it is so difficult and stressful to be an active conscious class JW. To believe one thing and behave another is a serious strain.

  It isn't impossible to change one's beliefs but it's very difficult and fairly rare.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  There may be some validity to this claim, but I just don't know where to separate it from the reality that is Jehovah's Witnesses. The most vigorous defenders seem to really allow themselves to fully believe 'Mother' without doubt.

  I could, however, see the doubters who are upset at themselves for doubting, being the ones who do more for the Watchtower. I don't think they would be arguing for the faith the hardest, but they may be the ones who go out of their way to aid the organization as a way to appease their guilt over their doubt.
• 

  Satanus

  So true. The quietest individuals are the most secure in their beliefs or lack of them. In his book of, when prophecy fails, leon festinger documented this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Festinger

  S
• 

  cofty

  I agree very much, people become irrational when their fondly held beliefs are challenged. As Shakespeare said - "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." (Hamlet Act 2)
• 

  jwfacts

  The subjects who were forced to confront the counterevidence went on to more forcefully advocate their original beliefs

  I think this comment is the key part in relation to JWs. When JW's are the subject of unfavourable news reports, or feel attacked in any way, they become more active in the preaching work.
• 

  whereami

  Barbara get ready for the wave of religious yahoos comming in here to prove you wrong, wright.

  And in 3..2..1..
• 

  bohm

  Debator/Reniaa comes to mind :-).
• 

  carla

  What would you guys have said when you were at your 'strongest' point in the jw's about this?