Why we prefer to believe rather than want to know – and what social consequences this has.
From the moment we think we understand something, we feel relieved. The brain breathes a sigh of relief: “Aha! Now it makes sense.” Whether this insight is based on facts or not is secondary—the main thing is that it fits into our worldview. The feeling of having understood something creates control, identity, and security. It is a psychological reward system that influences our thinking – and divides our society.
The need for meaning – no matter how wrong
Our brain loves order. It wants to recognize connections, interpret patterns, and classify things. This leads to a kind of desire to understand, a neurochemical dopamine rush when we recognize supposed connections – even if they are wrong. This “illusion of knowledge” has been well researched: people often overestimate their understanding of things because it feels like they know what they're talking about. As soon as a piece of information fits plausibly into an existing worldview, it is stored. Contradictions? They are rejected – for reasons of cognitive dissonance (Wikipedia).
The appeal of simple explanations
When it comes to complex topics in particular, many people resort to simple, emotional explanations – they offer a feeling of control. Here are a few examples:
- “Wind turbines spoil the landscape and kill birds.” That sounds concrete – but it is often exaggerated. NABU shows that wind power can be compatible with nature if planned correctly.
- “Climate change doesn't exist – it's all political agenda.” Studies show that climate change is real. Denying it often follows psychological patterns such as fear suppression or loss of control (Zeit).
- “Electric cars are worse than combustion engines.” This is only true if you look at individual aspects in isolation. The overall balance in favor of electric drives in the long term.
- “A vegan lifestyle is unhealthy.” The German Nutrition Society considers a well-planned vegan diet to be healthy – with certain restrictions.
- “Vaccination is dangerous; maybe they want to control us.” Belief in conspiracy theories fulfills a need for meaning and an enemy – not for evidence.
Confirmation instead of insight
As soon as we believe we have understood something, we unconsciously seek confirmation: through the media, through like-minded people, through social networks. This creates echo chambers in which people reinforce each other's beliefs.
This group identity can become powerful—it gives individuals the feeling that they are “on the right side.” Criticism or facts are then no longer perceived as objective arguments, but as attacks on one's own identity.
When opinion becomes identity
It becomes dangerous when beliefs become attitudes—and attitudes become identity. Then discussion turns into confrontation. Statements such as:
- “The AfD is not right-wing extremist, it just wants something different.”The German domestic intelligence service classifies parts of the AfD as confirmed right-wing extremist.
- “There are only men and women – what else?” Biology recognizes numerous intermediate forms – gender is not a rigid binary system.
When such opinions are glorified as a way of life, social progress is blocked – or even reversed.
Conclusion: Truth is not the goal, but a risk
Many beliefs do not arise from critical thinking, but from emotional needs. They provide structure, stability, and a sense of control. And people are reluctant to give them up – because that would mean allowing uncertainty.
Understanding is power – yes. But the feeling of understanding can be dangerous when it becomes self-certainty. Democracy thrives on doubt, discourse, and constant questioning. Not on ticking boxes.
