Discomfort is a pathway to truth

Often when we are disagreeing with someone who holds a political or social position diametrically opposed to our own we operate from the assumption that if only we can explain to them the what and why of why they are wrong about the way they feel, we could break through.

After all, we have all this evidence supporting this position that we feel so strongly about so clearly that must be how we arrived at it.

But that’s not how feelings work and not even how judgement actually works.

We think of our judgement as this dispassionate analysis of facts from which we draw a conclusion. We outwardly acknowledge the theoretical possibility that our judgement could be wrong only so far as to submit that as evidence that we are considering facts that contradict our argument.

But that is just a cover, we don’t actually entertain the possibility that we could be wrong. Our foundational assumption as normal human beings is that we are right. That our logical, rational, argument is so complete and correct that any evidence to the contrary is just plain wrong.

However the reality is that the stronger we feel about a particular topic the less our judgement has to do with logic or rationality. We don’t analyze all the data in a sober dispassionate way and then come to a conclusion of how to feel. Its not, “ok, based on the available evidence I feel angry about this.”

Instead the feeling comes first, then because we like to think of ourselves as rational creatures and because we fetishize “data” in modern society we seek to find a logical structure to justify our feeling. Its “goddamn I’m angry about that, let me go find evidence why that anger is justified.”.

But data is not reality, it is an incomplete, often incorrect, sample of reality. At best. So it’s very easy for us to find the particular data sample that supports our feeling.

In fact, even more than that, since we know that not all data is accurate we use that as an excuse to conveniently ignore the data that could prove our position to be wrong.

We judge the accuracy of any fact according to how well it justifies our feelings, not by how well it matches reality. Our feelings become our reality to the extent that if we don’t feel something about a fact, that fact doesn’t even exist for us.

When we encounter new information, if it aligns with the predetermined conclusion that our feelings have driven us to then that makes us feel good. But if it seems to contradict our position, then that makes us feel bad.

And since we are operating in a feelings regime and not an intellectual regime, it’s that feeling of comfort or discomfort that we use as the indicator of true or false.

We are lawyers seeking to prove an arbitrary position by cherry picking evidence not scientists seeking to find the truth by an unbiased analysis of as complete a set of reality as we can obtain.

What this means is that even though we may have reams of scientific or otherwise reliable and tested data that supports our feelings driven conclusion, that’s not how we arrived at that decision or judgment. If we are right, it’s by accident.

This is not as depressing as it sounds. We are not animals in thrall to our programming. We “naturally” act a certain way but if that way is in opposition to our higher goals and satisfaction, we can work against it. But only once we are aware of them.

Our core animal drives are just that, core. Fundamental to the way we work and so cannot be changed. But while our drives are impossible to change, the actions that result are not.

We can feel a certain way but consciously use that very feeling as an input into our judgement rather than unconsciously using it as a substitute for our judgment. Once we develop the awareness to recognize what we are feeling we can then start to see how those feelings are driving our trust in what to believe.

And the way to do this is to do this: not ignore our feelings but actually pay more attention to them. Move them to the forefront of our consciousness. In particular pay attention to when we are feeling uncomfortable.

We cannot change the way we feel about something, we cannot change these animal drives, but we can also recognize the truth of a situation independent from how we feel about it, or more fundamentally, independent of the drives that are engendering those feelings in us.

The key feeling that pushes our actions is discomfort, or more accurately the avoidance of discomfort. So when a fact makes us uncomfortable that is a sign that we really should pay more attention to it.

Because if our intellect and feelings agree: no discomfort. But if our feelings are pushing us one way and our intellectual judgment is actually saying, hold on, it’s the other way, then that is very stressful.

If we feel uncomfortable by some new information or data, that is actually the best sign that we should be paying extra attention to it, not dismissing it.

That tension is not only is a sign that we may be on to something, it is also a sign that we are in a feeling regime and not an intellectual regime in the first place.

It means that we should also be paying attention to the emotional state that we are currently experiencing and the current scenario it is arising from so we learn and correct for it better in the future. We should lean into it and thereby find the truth.

So the next time you are reading an article or hearing something that makes you feel uncomfortable, dig in. Face the facts that are causing your discomfort and you will start to build an accurate view of reality.