0
$\begingroup$

What psychiatric disorder would describe someone who doesn't believe anything presented to them (other than what they already know and are sure is true)?

P.S. Not to be distinguished by those that have a disorder because they are confused.

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Same as for the other question. Could you please provide some context to the question? How did you get to this question, what is the (scientific) relevance and what attempts have you made trying to find an answer? You may edit it into your post. $\endgroup$ Aug 15 '16 at 14:56
  • $\begingroup$ You might be thinking of confirmation bias. $\endgroup$
    – ThomasDoe
    Aug 16 '16 at 18:58
  • $\begingroup$ That isn't a disorder. The phenomena you are talking about is partially encapsulated by the following terms: 'Philosophical skepticism', 'Scientific skepticism' (although science is a form of belief), 'Denialism' (Climate denialism, holocaust denialism, Vaccine denialism, and denial of liberal ideology in general). Hope that points you in the right direction. $\endgroup$
    – D J Sims
    Aug 16 '16 at 21:57
2
$\begingroup$

My research on your question has so far not showed any disorder that matches this description. Something we all suffer from, however, is confirmation bias. We interpret new information in the light of our current views and disregard information that don't match our existing beliefs. Research has shown that being confronted with convincing arguments for the opposite view might strengthen our belief in the one we already hold. You can read more about this in books like Mistakes Were Made But not By Me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistakes_Were_Made_(But_Not_by_Me)

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Does the complexity of the underlying "belief" help ensure its endurance? $\endgroup$ Aug 18 '16 at 8:42
  • $\begingroup$ Also, is it possible that or views change, but some common grounds that has been firmly established does not. Sorry of like ranging the branches of a tree while the roots stay in place? $\endgroup$ Aug 18 '16 at 8:45
  • $\begingroup$ I myself never mind being wrong. So what's up? $\endgroup$ Aug 18 '16 at 8:46
  • $\begingroup$ Your research has not shown whether the strengthening of differing common views can itself lead to a common ground. You may want to investigate this one. Focusing on mute than one thing should bring greater stability, more tolerance, hence make it easier to live together. $\endgroup$ Aug 18 '16 at 9:55
  • $\begingroup$ Also, if one view has one opposite, four views have sixteen "opposites", but something could have more than one opposite. Because the probability of agreeing on everything narrows down explosively with the number of topics considered. $\endgroup$ Aug 18 '16 at 9:56

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.