We all tend to rationalize decisions after the fact to convince ourselves that what we did was the best thing we could have done. In the end, we filter out evidence that conflicts with the decision we’ve made, leaving only the supporting evidence. This in turn leads to a kind of tunnel vision that forces the choice between denying our own rectitude or ceding to overwhelming evidence that contradicts our own beliefs. “Either the evidence was wrong or I was wrong. I’m a good person, so the evidence must be wrong.” So the sometimes faulty thinking goes. Or, as psychologists would say, we seek to reduce cognitive dissonance in ingenious, self-deluding ways. We desire consistency when we internalize and act on our beliefs. This helps explain…
