Comment on Suspension Of Disbelief should be studied more
harmbugler@piefed.social 2 days agoThe 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”.
WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
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