Motivated Reasoning
The tendency to use reasoning to arrive at a desired conclusion rather than to evaluate evidence objectively. People often start with a conclusion they want to reach and then seek out evidence that supports it, while dismissing or ignoring contradictory evidence.
Examples
- Interpreting ambiguous evidence as supporting your existing position
- Rationalizing a decision you’ve already made rather than objectively evaluating alternatives
- Dismissing credible sources that contradict your beliefs
Why It Happens
Motivated reasoning protects our sense of self, our group identity, and our worldview. It feels more comfortable to defend what we already believe than to genuinely consider that we might be wrong.
How to Counteract
- Practice intellectual humility — acknowledge you might be wrong
- Seek out disconfirming evidence deliberately
- Ask “What would change my mind?” and actually consider the answer
- Separate your identity from your beliefs
Soldier vs. Scout Mindset
Julia Galef distinguishes two modes of reasoning in The Scout Mindset (2021):
| Soldier Mindset | Scout Mindset |
|---|---|
| Reasoning is like defensive combat. | Reasoning is like mapmaking. |
| Decide what to believe by asking “Can I believe this?” or “Must I believe this?” depending on your motives. | Decide what to believe by asking “Is this true?” |
| Finding out you’re wrong means suffering a defeat. | Finding out you’re wrong means revising your map. |
| Seek out evidence to fortify and defend your beliefs. | Seek out evidence that will make your map more accurate. |
| Directionally motivated reasoning, rationalizing, denial, self-deception, wishful thinking. | Accuracy-motivated reasoning, truth-seeking, discovery, objectivity, intellectual honesty. |
Motivated reasoning aligns with the soldier mindset. The countermeasures above aim to shift toward the scout mindset.