Dr Peter Moore: Emotions are far stronger than logic - and can lead to illogical decisions

How can anyone passionately believe something when all the evidence shows it to be nonsense?

This may not matter too much if the illogical belief is that Torquay are going to win the league or that cream should always be put on scones before jam but how can we explain, for example, the Trump supporters in America who still believe that the election was stolen?

It is easy to argue that these supporters are all 'red necks' and not very bright but that would be unfair. Often intelligent people can believe something despite overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.

And how can we persuade anyone to change their mind?

The answer lies in our emotions or, to use a common expression, head against heart.

We all have both an emotional side and a logical side. It was once suggested that the left side of the brain controlled our logical side and the right side the emotions. Although the brain is far more complicated it is an easy way to look at the problem.

Emotions are far stronger than logic. This makes evolutionary sense.

When our hunter gatherer ancestors heard a rustle in the bushes they had to follow their emotional response: “Help, it’s a sabre-toothed tiger – run.”

Any early man who waited to calculate the mathematical chances of a sabre-toothed tiger against the wind rustling the leaves and decided that, on balance, it was probably the wind might be right nine times out of ten.

The problem would be that, on the tenth time, he’d be eaten. Much better to react to the emotions and run.

The whole idea of using logic to solve problems is a relatively new part of human evolution.

It might have been helpful to the hunter gatherer when planning when and where to hunt but useless when stalking in the jungle.

The revolution came with the enlightenment.

The ideas of scientists such as Isaac Newton showed that cold logic is as important as emotions.

The Royal Society was founded in 1660 to discuss these ideas. By the 18th century, enlightenment ideas were being discuss in coffee houses, books and journals.

Cold logic threatened the established churches and the monarchy.

It also suggested the revolutionary idea that government should be with the consent of the governed.

This flew in the face of the divine right of kings which suggested that the monarch was chosen by God so that opposing the monarch meant opposing God. This was a great idea if you were the monarch.

Ironically, it was in America that the idea that scientific reasoning could be applied to politics. The people, by which they meant free men, should decide their government.

When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence he assumed that decisions should be based on logic not emotion.

This head v heart conflict is still with us.

By appealing to their emotions not their logic, Donald Trump is able to gain support.

Pointing out that several independent courts have investigated the election in detail and found no evidence of malpractice is never going to convince someone whose emotions are shouting 'stop the steal'.

Thomas Jefferson would be furious.

But it is not only in America that the heart can rule the head.

Politics here can produce more heat than light. I do not want to open up the Brexit debate again but the leavers argued passionately and emotionally to 'take back control' or 'get Brexit done' while remainers failed to produce any emotional slogans.

I’m afraid that J K Rowling’s 7,000-word logical essay was never going to beat an emotional onslaught from the transgender lobby.

Does this concern any of us in our day-to-day lives?

It is helpful to understand that powerful emotional feelings can override logic.

If we ever start to become angry or passionate in our arguments, it is worth standing back and asking whether our response is based on emotion or logic.

Decisions based on logic are harder but get better results.