Comment on Suspension Of Disbelief should be studied more
WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
I think this is a fascinating idea.
And I just tried to explain it to a friend and she didn’t get it, then I came back to the thread to find respondents who didn’t get it in the same way she didn’t.
She kept trying to warp it into something like confirmation bias, even though I kept trying to get her to see that the significant thing about suspension of disbelief is that truth and reality don’t even enter into it - they aren’t even meaningful concepts.
The only thing that’s necessary when disbelief is suspended is that the narrative remain acceptably internally consistent. Whether itt true or not or corresponds with reality or not is entirely irrelevant, since the entire process of expectng and testing for those qualities has been set aside.
Again, that’s a fascinating idea. I’ve long suspected that Trump is unable to distinguish between truth and falsehood, but that that was a consequence of his narcissism and egotism - that effectively the only measure he has for truth or falsehood is whether he believes something to be true or not - that the concept of consensual reality isn’t even coherent in his entirely self-absorbed internal reality.
But I’ve long wondered how the at least somewhat more sane people following him manage it. Something like confirmation bias would only work up to a point that Trump has long since gone beyond.
And I think you might be on to something - just as I do when I sit down to read a novel or watch a movie or a series, when they start engaging in politics, they just switch off the part of their brain that tracks trith and reality and instead just follow along with the narrative, whatever it might be.
The only thing that’s necessary when disbelief is suspended is that the narrative remain acceptably internally consistent.
“Acceptably” is holding it together there. Do you mean everyone has a range of what’s acceptable? I agree with that, in that there’s some personal threshold before they snap out of it and say “Hang on, this doesn’t make sense any more”.
Well… yeah. I thonk it’s fairly self-evidentvthat ondividuals have different threaholds for suspension of disbelief, and that the thresholds even vary between subjects with a given individual (for example, it’s harder to maintain suspension of disbelief relative to an area in which one has expertise).
But that’s not really relevant - I just included “acceptably” to be more precise and accurate.
The relevant part is the core idea that the mechanism by which at least some seemingly rational people support blitheringly insane and factually unsupportable political views is not really some combination of prejudices and biases by which they convince themselves of the nominal truth and correspondence to reality of their beliefs, but by engaging in suspension of disbelief - by entirely switching off the parts of their brain that measure truth and correspondence with reality, just as I do when I read a novel or watch a movie.
I certainly don’t know that to be the case, but it’s a fascinating possibility
A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip 2 days ago
Yeah this exactly.
Something else that might play into it: so many conspiracy nuts refer to movies as if they were history, or prophecy, or scientific research. As if they were valid in a way they clearly aren’t, because they’re fiction. Maybe they really do live in a world where these things are interchangeable.
WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
…there might well be something to that.
Yes - exactly as you say, research needs to be done on suspension of disbelief.
And thanks for sharing that fascinating idea.
LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 2 days ago
This exactly. Learning programming was a HUGE hit to my understanding and trust of myself.
Most people don’t go through the visceral experience of seeing how shitty the human experience lines up with reality. Such people absolutely believe in bullshit for the simple reason that it feels correct.