(May 20, 2016 at 11:42 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:(May 20, 2016 at 11:23 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: Ugh...what is their end game then, if it's intentional? In AAA's case, is it just to stir the pot for the fun of it? Or do you think he actually believes he can sucker someone into believing?
Part of it is simply fooling themselves. They work in small social circles of like-minded persons, and they repeat something "around the circle" until everyone THEY know agrees with it, so Therefore It Must Be True. This is commonly found in religion-based universities, but is not unique to them. After a while, they think they represent a valid counter-view because they've managed to block out the counter-narrative. [Edit to Add: The "counter-narrative" here being the actual, primary narrative that they're trying to block. Sorry for the poor phrasing!]
And it gets worse, there is lots of evidence to show that once you come to a belief, then even being shown evidence opposing your belief (even to the level of discrediting it like AAA's beloved creatardism) will push you to more extreme and strident holding of that belief. There is a stage where nothing will shift you from a wrong belief. Here's a good article on the phenomenon in a political context.
I honestly think that AAA is at this stage with respect to ID and creatardism, and no amount of the rest of us pointing out the sheer ridiculousness of his arguments or the wrongness of his beliefs is going to change them. He has taken on his beliefs too strongly, invested too much emotional effort into them and has owned them so totally that any challenge no matter how well argued or cited is going to do anything but strengthen his wrong belief.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home