“That confirms my suspicions.” -- everyone's reaction to the impeachment hearings. For many, this has been touted as yet more evidence we are living in some sort of post-truth era, despite the fact that this is how humans have reasoned since before we painted on cave walls. 1/5

We have always been motivated reasoners, and as primates we are highly motivated to avoid social costs, so while reasoning the pursuit of belonging goals will always take priority over accuracy goals if accepting counterevidence threatens our reputations among trusted peers. 2/5

I think the frustration that "facts don't work," mostly comes from people in professions that pursue accuracy goals or identify as members of evidence-based communities. In those groups, you are able to satisfy your belonging goals by signaling your pursuit of accuracy goals. 3/5

In those communities you often (but not always) gain reputation when you update your priors based on the evidence, even if it means admitting you were wrong - factually, morally, or politically - but outside such subcultures, doing so could lead to social costs. 4/5

If you'd like to hear more about this, I have book coming out next year, AND we did a show about these topics in NYC a few months back. Podcast: https://youarenotsosmart.com/2019/06/06/yanss-155-what-we-can-learn-about-why-we-dangerously-disagree-on-the-truth-from-the-dress-yanny-and-bloie-presented-live-in-new-york-at-the-bell-house/ YouTube: 5/5

More shows on this: https://youarenotsosmart.com/2018/08/04/yanss-133-how-politics-became-our-identity/ AND https://youarenotsosmart.com/2018/02/26/yanss-122-how-our-unchecked-tribal-psychology-pollutes-politics-science-and-just-about-everything-else/