Have you ever had an argument you knew you couldn’t win? I’m not talking about defending yourself against an unprovoked attack, or (like one of my current characters) defending yourself even if you know you’re guilty. I’m talking about a real, honest-to-goodness debate where you’ve laid out your side with logic, clarity and evidence—only to have the other person just shake their head and say no, they will still hold to what they believe instead, and cannot accept what you’re saying.
I’m sure this happens with matters of faith, politics and social issues more often than we realize (particularly if we isolate ourselves from such topics). Two sides can look at the same situation and come up with completely different solutions or opinions on how to respond. Suddenly the sites are no longer set on the issue but on those who oppose the way they would approach that issue.
I suppose this is part of the human experience, part of what it means to have free will. We have the freedom not only to choose or reject God, but to choose or reject the opinions of those around us. And in America, that freedom has been protected by the blood of our servicemen and women.
But what is it that makes it so hard for someone to win over someone else, no matter how strong the argument? In digging in to the motivation behind my characters, I’ve often had to ask this question so their conversion to a new way of thinking will be believable. Art imitating life—or that’s the goal, anyway.
Recently my husband came home with the answer to this dilemma. He’d been listening to the radio and something one of the guests said struck him, and then me, as profound. The guest said: “it’s impossible to reason someone out of a belief they weren’t reasoned into.”
This explains so much, but it’s also cautionary. It explains that often emotion is the deciding factor in what people believe, not logic. I recall hearing a Christian physicist talk about how he’d revealed evidence for a Creator to a group of naturalist scientists. While several of them were persuaded by the logic, evidence and explanation of the pieces science cannot explain—the origin of life, for example—relatively few were able to abandon their belief that there is no God. They did not want to accept the notion of a Being who might want to be involved in their life. Possibly they could accept the idea that a Creator made the universe then abandoned us rather than accept the loving God of the Bible who cares about every detail of our life. They weren’t afraid of the facts, they were afraid their life must change if they had to redefine their worldview.
So that argument wasn’t lost on the basis of reason or logic or evidence, it was lost on the basis of emotion. And emotion is the part that reason cannot touch.
But as I said, it’s also a cautionary statement. If we don’t know what we believe, and why, we may go to incredible lengths to protect our belief system but how, really, do we differ from those who believe something just because? Just because of the way they were raised, or their culture has taught them to think a certain way, or those they surround themselves with have fed only one kind of belief system into their head?
The next time you approach an argument, think about that. Are you on the side of reason or emotion?
Join Me!