Was thinking today about the incentives requisite for a person to change their belief systems.
To take an unexpected angle, the argument starts with energy expenditure. All other things being equal and inert, it's easier to maintain a belief than to change it. For a person to disqualify their own beliefs they have to think about them, and thinking, researching, discussing, takes time and effort. So when a belief system exists, it's going to be sticky and lack inertia by it's very nature.
After that we have to start talking about incentives. What incentive do I have to change this belief system? At this point, I'd think that for many, incentives are strongly tied up in familial and tribal politics. If I live in a community that is predominantly pro-Trump, I don't really have any incentives to change my belief. This means that until it's obviously clear that Trump presents a danger to immediate well-being, in pro-Trump communities he's going to be looked at favourably. Because even without any evidence, the belief is by it's nature sticky, so when incentives push the belief in the wrong direction there's really no hope.
So I guess the phenomena of Trump, then, is mostly about creating an environment where poverty, ignorance, racism and the like can thrive in hot-beds around the country, and where people have incentives to support a guy who appeals to their ignorance and racist tendencies. The only thing that can truly break it is when Trump's policies hit their back-yard.
To take an unexpected angle, the argument starts with energy expenditure. All other things being equal and inert, it's easier to maintain a belief than to change it. For a person to disqualify their own beliefs they have to think about them, and thinking, researching, discussing, takes time and effort. So when a belief system exists, it's going to be sticky and lack inertia by it's very nature.
After that we have to start talking about incentives. What incentive do I have to change this belief system? At this point, I'd think that for many, incentives are strongly tied up in familial and tribal politics. If I live in a community that is predominantly pro-Trump, I don't really have any incentives to change my belief. This means that until it's obviously clear that Trump presents a danger to immediate well-being, in pro-Trump communities he's going to be looked at favourably. Because even without any evidence, the belief is by it's nature sticky, so when incentives push the belief in the wrong direction there's really no hope.
So I guess the phenomena of Trump, then, is mostly about creating an environment where poverty, ignorance, racism and the like can thrive in hot-beds around the country, and where people have incentives to support a guy who appeals to their ignorance and racist tendencies. The only thing that can truly break it is when Trump's policies hit their back-yard.