[dudeman13]

>At one point, all of the relevant facts and figures were loaded into your working memory, and with that information you arrived at a conclusion

You are awfully optimistic about the rationality of humans, aren't you? :)

[pc86]

I know this is a joke but it seems unnecessary. Most people actually do use evidence and logic to arrive at their opinions. The problem is some people are presented with incorrect or fabricated evidence. Some people draw incorrect conclusions, or maybe some of the evidence is above their head so they ignore that when it's vital to proper understanding. Some people aren't particularly good at logical thinking, or never progressed past introductory levels.

This is all why you can show identical evidence to a group of people and get multiple, sometimes very different, opinions.

[leaflets2]

> Most people actually do use evidence and logic

That's not how humans function.

They are social animals and copy the opinions and beliefs of those they want to be (stay) friends with.

Being part of the group is what matters, evolutionary, not logics and being right.

And to influence others, step 1 is to make them look at you as a friend. There's a book about that :-)

[addaon]

“Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal.” -- Heinlein

[fleddr]

"Most people actually do use evidence and logic to arrive at their opinions."

They do not. The brain is a machine of lies designed to keep you alive, rather than arrive at some pure truth. The vast majority of your brain power is subconscious. Your brain is extremely good at arriving what it needs to know, not at knowing or truthfulness in general.

It takes an incredible effort in critical thinking (which does not come natural) to unravel the layers of misdirection and crap your brain has produced in order to come to a kind of objective truth. It's such a headache inducing process that few will undertake it. Even more so when the outcome of critical thinking is typically uncomfortable.

Perhaps more unsettling is that even the very concept of you is a lie. Not your body, obviously. Your inner self, your identity if you will. You think you're some kind of well defined, consistent character. Carved in stone. One could perhaps summarize you in 10 bullet points and this idea of you is pretty stable over time. That's how you know it's you.

In reality, the brain has established this concept of you because it's in your best interest. Every little piece of input, thought or memory that directly contradicts it (which is constantly) is carefully dismissed whilst the confirmation of the false belief is amplified. Not because it is correct, because it is preferential.

I'm happy to leave you in this confused state on a random Tuesday. You can now think that this guy is full of shit, which proves my point of your brain filtering information that is not in your best interest. Or, you can agree. The outcome is the same. I'm right. Or, rather, my brain thinks it is. Which is what brains do. It's a defensive organ.

[dudeman13]

I have a feeling if OP had read some of the papers surrounding Daniel Kahneman (and the works Kahneman cited) he wouldn't be so sure about mankind's rationality.

It's like the vast majority of experiments on the subject ends up with "and then they proceeded to use their intuition and who they like more to make their decision".

Also, I think it was "Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student" that also said that logical arguments are the weakest kind of rhetorical arguments since basically anything else is more likely to convince people.