The Atlantic recently (16 June 2024) published “The Motivated Ignorance of Trump Supporters — They can’t claim they didn’t know”, by Peter Wehner: “Motivated ignorance is a widespread phenomenon; most people, to one degree or another, employ it. What matters is the degree to which one embraces it, and the consequences of doing so.”
I believe there should be added an acknowledgment that the “degree” of embracement defies objective measurement, as does the choice of which possible consequence to emphasize.
A less pejorative description of “motivated ignorance” might be “the avoiding of cognitive dissonance”, which seems to be a natural aim of the psychological makeup of human beings (and possibly of other animals, since it is obvious that being clear about matters is much preferable to being confused and unable to make decisions).
I happen to share Wehner’s dismay that so many Trump supporters do not weigh significantly the negative aspects of much of Trump’s behavior and actions. But I am also frustrated that so many people, very much including purported specialist experts, ignore the plain facts about quite a number of other matters as well:
—> That carbon dioxide is not the prime cause of global warming or climate change
—> That HIV is not the cause of AIDS
—> That high levels of blood cholesterol are not the cause of cardiovascular disease
—> That the muscle weakening “side” effects of statin drugs are far more dangerous than any possible benefit from those drugs
—> That “Loch Ness Monsters” are real, perfectly natural, animals, as demonstrated by sonar, films, and photographs taken underwater as well as at the surface.
—> And more . . . I am distressed that so many people differ with me about what I regard as obvious facts about economics, politics, proper academic administration, political correctness, and other subjects as well.
But I have learned that human beings do not develop beliefs based on demonstrable facts — quite a bitter pill to be swallowed by someone who was captivated by science at an early age and worked at it for decades.
An important early point on my learning curve was joining the Society for Scientific Exploration [1]. It had been founded to encourage proper scientific, evidence-based, discussion of topics ignored by the mainstream scientific community, or even dismissed as pseudoscience: UFOs, psychic phenomena, Bigfoot, etc. The Society's founders were firmly established academics with impressive publication and achievement credentials in many fields, among them astronomy, astrophysics, engineering, medicine, history, psychology . . . .
I had been surprised at first that such distinguished scholars and scientists could take seriously topics that had seemed to me beyond the pale of believability. But then I realized that many or even all of them might also find it hard to believe that a well-published chemist and Dean of Arts & Sciences could seriously believe that Loch Ness Monsters are actual, real, living animals.
Human beings acquire their beliefs from parents, peers, teachers, preachers, and all sorts of other experiences over the years [2]. And once a belief about something has been reached, human psychology makes it difficult to change that belief, by making it very easy to overlook, or not to notice, or to notice but ignore, evidence that might suggest that a long-held belief is flawed in some way, let alone completely wrong.
The classic work about this is When Prophecy Fails [3], which describes a millennial sect that had calculated the date of the coming Apocalypse. When that date arrived and the Apocalypse failed to happen, the obvious action was taken: Not an abandonment of the millennial belief, but merely a recalculation of the date.
A classic example in science is the Ptolemaic theory of planetary motions [4]. It was obvious in Ptolemy’s time and place that these motions must be perfectly circular, since that is the most perfect possible orbit, and heavenly happenings would naturally be perfect. But since actual observations could not be accommodated in such a simple manner, Ptolemy added smaller circular movements for the planets to the main circular motion; which by hindsight we describe pejoratively as postulating “Wheels within Wheels”, which has become an idiom for unwarranted postulating of complexities to preserve a preconceived belief.
It seems unwarranted to describe pejoratively (“motivated ignorance”) a quality that is possessed universally by humankind. How subjective such a judgment is can be illustrated by considering religious beliefs, which are probably held as strongly as any beliefs could be.
According to Pew's Research Center [5], humankind is divided in religious beliefs in about this way: Christianity 31.5%, Islam 23.2%, Hinduism 15%, Buddhism 7.1%, Judaism 0.2%; unaffiliated 16.3%, folk and other religions, 5.9% and 0.8 respectively.
To an unbiased alien observer, it would be obvious that none of those holding any one of those beliefs is likely to be truly right; yet many or most of them believe themselves to be right and the others wrong, exemplifying a high degree of “motivated ignorance”.
It would make better sense, objectively speaking, if in such circumstances we were to recognize that what we ourselves believe is a happenstance consequent on our unique, individual, heredity, upbringing, and experiences, and that those who hold other beliefs, including beliefs directly contradictory to our own, are not stubbornly resisting the acknowledging of tangible certified facts but similarly illustrate that human beliefs are shaped by numerous strong influences, among which tangible, objective, facts do not play a singular decisive role.
Since it seems better to live peaceably than to fight, it would make sense to find ways of living on good terms with people whose beliefs differ from our own. It might also be productive to look for reasons why others might hold views that differ from ours.
Wehner may have missed the point or have it backwards. The facts about Trump’s behavior are simply irrelevant to his supporters. “Motivated ignorance” did not bring Trump supporters; Trump is a symptom, not a cause.
Plausible suggested causes include the long neglect by society’s governing forces — including the mass media [6] — of large swaths of rural and urban working-class populations, and the class-division accompanying that neglect, mirrored in egregious economic and educational disparities. Trump, highly accomplished and unscrupulous narcissistic populist, gathered supporters by criticizing the powers that be and thereby seeming to speak for the neglected masses.
**********************************************************************************************************
[1] https://www.scientificexploration.org/
[2] For instance, equally intelligent and interested people differed over whether or not Velikovsky’s interpretations were believable: Henry H. Bauer, Beyond Velikovsky: The History of a Public Controversy, University of Illinois Press 1984/1999; particularly chapters 11 & 12
[3] Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken & Stanley Schachter, When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World, University of Minnesota Press, 1956;
See also Leon Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University Press, 1957
[4] https://pages.uoregon.edu/imamura/121/lecture-3/ptolemy.html
[5] The Global Religious Landscape; https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-exec
[6] Batya Ungar-Sargon, Bad News: How Woke Media Is Undermining Democracy, Encounter Books, 2021. The book’s message is underscored by the scant attention given to it by the mass media.
Thanks.
I largely agree, except re RFK, Jr; since he has no real chance, it's like not voting at all
I was fully aware of Trump's shortcomings in 2016 and 2020 but the alternatives were even more odious. In 2024, there is actually a non-odious alternative, RFK, Jr.. He is himself not perfect but compared to the alternatives he is heaven-sent. Writing as a Christian, I don't believe all other religions are totally wrong, just wrong about some things. That is true about politics also. We have some common ground with those with a different overall political stance and it is possible to work with such people. Those whose political stance is that their opponents should be silenced, imprisoned, or killed cannot be worked with, only opposed.