No matter the means by which a person is led to believe in something, for practical purposes, what is enough is the person to be convinced. Thus, the conviction or belief influences the decision-making of the individuals, both in the personal scope and in the collective scope. This has philosophical and psychological implications, but I will stick to just one: the implication policy .
In what ways does a person become convinced of something? She may come to conclusions "alone", or rather not explicitly, or by the contact, interpretation and acceptance of other people's thesis.
When I say "alone", we can not forget all of her education, culture and ideology passed on to her throughout her life, as well as her personal experiences and the subjective interpretation of her memories. When I say "not explicitly," it means without being told directly about a thesis. Finally, when I refer to "through contact with other people," it can be a book, a movie, or directly from someone.
Thinking about persuading people, there are several ways:
(I) it can be convinced by means of a Logical-deductive reasoning: if all societies investing in high technology industrialized products are rich societies, then Brazil needs an investment policy in industry and technology if it wants to be rich - observe the if / then formula learned in Logic);
(II) can be convinced by a authority argument: if my candidate says that the next events will happen that way, I believe without weighing too much because it came from him ; or if my candidate claims that those who have to understand economics are his ministers, I believe, because came from him .
(III) by a Image: a good suit, printed smile, eloquent speech and some technical terms are enough to convince many voters that the candidate is an efficient, neutral and Of success , not a politician;
(IV) through emotional triggers : O fear of urban violence (or the feeling of injustice and impotence, or even the feeling of urgency with this problem) makes many voters believe that a simple solution, such as releasing the gun, is enough, that the problem will be solved - hence they believe in the candidate.
You could list several other forms of persuasion, but that's not the point. The point is that it does not matter if there is evidence that logical-deductive reasoning is wrong (or any of the other options); no matter if there are flaws or counter-arguments, once the belief that this is true is established, this becomes the truth. The principle of perception is greater than the principle of reality.
This principle is so strong that some people see the world as the opposite of what may be happening. A quick example: since the decade of 90, there has been a series of privatizations and economic opening, as well as the maintenance of deregulation of the financial system. Added to other factors (abusive banking spreads, rents, etc.), led to an increase in public debt, deindustrialization and dollarization of the economy. However, a neoliberal can disregard the data and quietly state: "this was because we needed more free market yet ; less state interference would solve the problem. "
Como mudar isso? Geralmente é uma mistura de muita paciência, tato e demonstrações factuais. É estar aberto ao debate, em que as duas partes mostram seus dados concretos e explicações. Em outros momentos, temos que aceitar que as pessoas não estão emocionalmente abertas para ver o lado contrário (o mesmo é verdade para nós mesmos, importante salientar). Em se tratando de política, eu particularmente prefiro mostrar que há alternativas para as pessoas do jeito mais trabalhoso, porém do mais duradouro: apresentando ideias e propostas viáveis, como elas serão feitas, e por quem. Eu prefiro dialogar com as pessoas tendo em mente um projeto para o Brasil.