David Ray Griffin interview

What is going on here?

Interview with Griffin

John Salvi III, written in prison

This is not an admission of guilt. However it is a statement about the persecution which the catholic people face. The catholic people are being persecuted in the workplace as well as in a whole. There are leaders in Government both Local, state and Federal which are well aware of the abuse taking place.

There is a movement in society which seeks the destruction of the church. One method these individuals use is to buy up companies, corporations and businesses after which putting themselves out of business and or laying off catholic employees. This layoff procedure for Catholics occurs to a great extent in the U.S. school systems, police departments, fire depts. etc. The catholic church is being floored financially.

Why do the free masons persecute the catholic people? Because their good at it. The catholic church is dealing with a group of people who are intelligent, mean, nasty and judicious. These individuals run society and have a good system for themselves but seek to keep the catholic church from printing a currency and having the same system.

John Salvi III, accused of murdering several workers in an abortion clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts, in 1994.

Boston Globe, January 6, 1995. Misspellings are Salvi's.

Belief persistence

Search

Selective exposure

Inference

Biased assimilation

Belief overkill

The Neutral Evidence Principle

vs. polarization

Lord, Ross, and Lepper (1979) 24 proponents and 24 opponents of death penalty.

1. Read one card with a brief summary of a result of a study, apparently randomly chosen from 10.
2. Rate incremental and cumulative change in: Pro/Opp attitude; Belief in deterrent effect.
3. Read detailed research descriptions of same study summarized on card, including procedure, results, prominent criticisms, results table and graph.
4. Rate: How well study was conducted.
   How convincing study was as evidence.
   Write explanation of convincingness rating.
   Rate incremental and cumulative change in: Pro/Opp attitude; Belief in deterrent effect.
5. Same procedure repeated with study with opposite result, and a different method: (before/after adoption of d.p. OR adjacent state with/without d.p.)

Lord, Ross, & Lepper's results:
``Biased Assimiliation'':

Subjects:   Proponents        Opponents
--------    ----------------  ----------------
Study       D.P.   D.P. does  D.P.   D.P. does
suggesting: deters not deter  deters not deter
----------------------------------------------
How well
conducted?  +1.5   -1.6       -2.1   -0.3
How
convincing? +1.4   -1.8       -2.1    +0.1

But... `Our subjects' main inferential shortcoming ... did not lie in their inclination to process evidence in a biased manner...' (p. 2107)

Lord, Ross, & Lepper (cont'd): ``Attitude Polarization'':

Change in belief in deterrent effect of d.p.
                 by: Proponents  Opponents
                     ----------  ---------
After  |d.p. deters    +1.9        +0.7
results|
       |doesn't deter  -0.9        -1.6

After  |d.p. deters    +0.7        -1.0
details|
       |doesn't deter  +0.7        -0.8

`Our subjects' main inferential shortcoming ... did not lie in their inclination to process evidence in a biased manner ... Rather, their sin lay in their readiness to use evidence already processed in a biased manner to bolster the very theory or belief that initially ``justified'' the processing bias.' (p. 2107)

Meszaros et al., 1995

Complications per million children
                         UNVACCINATED VACCINATED
Cases of Whooping Cough    101,900      9,700
High-pitched Unusual Crying   -         4,900
Temporary Hospitalization   11,100      1,100
Temporary Unconsciousness/Confusion
 From Whooping Cough            25          2
 From Vaccine                 -            40
Convulsions                   -         2,600
Long-term Brain Damage
 From Whooping Cough            8           1
 From Vaccine                 -            15
Death
 From Whooping Cough          130          13
 From Vaccine                 -             5

Source: A. R. Hinman and J. P. Koplan. Journal of the American Medical Association, June 15, 1984.

Selective exposure

Bias in search as well as inference:

                    inference
 search             processes
--------> evidence ----------> inference

example

Why do we irrationally persist in beliefs?

1. Beliefs about Thinking

Why do (some) people think one-sided thinking is good?

• Survival of the ``fittest'' institutions?
• Confusion of good thinking with...
  ...expertise?
  ...effective advocacy?

2. Wishful thinking
Distortion of beliefs by desires

Kunda (1987) -- caffeine & fibrocystic disease

• Article presenting evidence that caffeine consumption increases women's risk of fibrocystic disease, a serious condition which can lead to breast cancer.
  .. How convinced are you by the article?
  .. How much caffeine do you consume?
• Four groups of subjects:
  Female low caffeine consumers
  Female high caffeine consumers
  Male low caffeine consumers
  Male high caffeine consumers

3. Desire for consistency, or to avoid ``dissonance''?

Desire to see oneself as a good decision maker?
...as a good belief former?

Desire to have been right all along
vs.
Desire to be as right as possible now.

Belief overkill (Jervis)

``People who favored a nuclear test-ban believed that testing created a serious medical danger, would not lead to major weapons improvements, and was a source of international tension. Those who opposed the treaty usually took the opposite position on all three issues.'' (p. 129)

``choices are easier since all considerations are seen as pointing to the same conclusion. Nothing has to be sacrificed. But, since the real world is not as benign as these perceptions, values are indeed sacrificed'' (p. 130)

When do people avoid value trade-offs? Jervis speculates:

• When it is easy to avoid them, i.e. when...
  ...values involved are vague and ill-defined.
  ...money (easy to compare) is not involved.
  ...effects of actions are hard to predict.
• When we especially want to avoid them, i.e. when...
  ...values are deeply held.
  ...all available decisions require major sacrifices.

Ellsworth and Ross (1983)
Capital punishment

	Proponents	Opponents
Feel that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent than life imprisonment	93%	8%
Do not feel ...	7%	92%
Society has a right to get revenge ...	45%	7%
It is immoral for society to take a life regardless of the crime...	10%	82%

Yet, 66% of proponents claimed that they "would still favor capital punishment even if it were proven to be no better than life ... as a deterrent." ... 48% would favor it if it were no deterrent at all.

Only 3% of opponents would favor it if it were shown to be a deterrent.

Test item for belief overkill

Candidate 1 favors a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman and favors merging the Drug Department with the Alcohol Department to form a single Drug and Alcohol Department.

Candidate 2 takes the opposite position on these issues.

What is the effect of the candidates' positions on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman on your evaluation of the two candidates?
Strongly favors Candidate 1 ... Strongly favors Candidate 2

What is the effect of the candidates' positions on merging the Drug Department with the Alcohol Department to form asingle Drug and Alcohol Department on your evaluation of the two candidates?
Strongly favors Candidate 1 ... Strongly favors Candidate 2

Another test item (Mark Kaltenbach)

The United States must employ any means necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring the capability to produce a nuclear weapon, including military strikes.

A military attack against Iran would be costly in terms of lives, finances, and American standing in the world.

If Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, it will likely use it in an actual attack.

A nuclear Iran will be more capable of spreading its oppressive style of government to other countries.

Example from the Ways of Responding test (Jacques Barber)

You have been driving in an unfamiliar neighborhood looking for the home of a new friend. You don't see a dog as it passes in front of your car. You hit it with your car, and the dog dies.

Your initial thoughts are:
"I'VE DONE A TERRIBLE THING. HOW CAN I FORGIVE MYSELF? I'M SUCH A TERRIBLE DRIVER."

... What further thoughts do you have?

It's really terrible, it's all my fault.
But, what could I do, I didn't see this stupid dog.
Why wasn't it penned or tied up?
Anyways, this doesn't mean I am a biad driver.
It was just bad luck.

What would you then do (if anything)?

I'd try to be more cautious in my driving.

Janis's symptoms of defective decision making

1. Gross omissions in surveying alternatives.
2. Gross omissions in surveying objectives.
3. Failure to examine major costs and risks of the preferred choice.
4. Poor information search.
5. Selective bias in processing information at hand.
6. Failure to reconsider originally rejected alternatives.
7. Failure to work out detailed implementation, monitoring, and contingency plans.

Examples of decisions used by Herek, Janis and Huth.

Good ones (both liberal and conservative)

Indochina

Quemon-Matsu II

Cuban missile crisis

Yom Kippur war

Suez

Bad ones

Greek Civil War

Korean War I

Berlin blockade

Tonkin Gulf

Vietnam ground force

Arab-Israeli War

Results from Herek, Janis, and Huth

Some items used by Stanovich and West to measure AOMT attitudes

• Intuition is the best guide in making decisions.
• One should disregard evidence that conflicts with one's established beliefs.
• It is better to simply believe in a religion than to be confused by doubts about it.
• Abandoning a previous belief is a sign of strong character.
• Changing your mind is a sign of weakness.
• It is important to persevere in your beliefs even when evidence is brought to bear against them.
• People should always take into consideration evidence that goes against their beliefs.
• A person should always consider new possibilities.

• Difficulties can usually be overcome by thinking about the problem, rather than through waiting for good fortune.
• Coming to decisions quickly is a sign of wisdom.
• If I think longer about a problem I will be more likely to solve it.
• Beliefs should always be revised in response to new information or evidence.
• Certain beliefs are just too important to abandon no matter how good a case can be made against them.
• There is nothing wrong with being undecided about many issues.
• Good teachers never let you leave the classroom with doubts about the subject matter.
• A professor's job is to communicate the facts to his or her students.

Argument evaluation test (Stanovich and West)

Dale's belief: One way to reduce the national debt would be to reduce congressional salaries.
Indicate the extent to which you are in agreement with Dale's belief:
1 = Strongly disagree ... 4 = Strongly agree

Dale's premise or justification for belief: Congressional salaries are very high, and cutting them would make a significant step towards paying off the huge national debt.
Critic's counter-argument: The national debt is so large that totally eliminating all congressional salaries would still hardly make a dent in it. (Assume statement factually correct.)
Dale's rebuttal to Critic's counter-argument: The members of congress, whose actions are to a considerable extent responsible for the huge national debt, earn salaries several times higher than the national average. (Assume statement factually correct.)

Indicate the strength of Dale's rebuttal...
1 = Very weak ... 4 = Very strong

Why I have to be right

:)