Brian Griffin is cognitively dissonant in regards to religion

Thus, without any prior disclosure of content by my opponent, I can say that his argument is exactly what I had anticipated. Or, more fairly, what Google had anticipated for me. So why in the world would I accept a debate knowing full well that Brian, the character in question, has had numerous experiences that give him close to unquestionable justification for believing in some sort of theism or deism? You’ll just have to read to find out! In this debate, I will be defending four primary premises. If any of the four are independently true or more plausibly true, then the resolution is more plausibly false or inscrutable. My first argument is that:(1) We have no psychological data to conclude the presence of cognitive dissonanceMy second argument is: (2) Cognitive dissonance may not obtain In the Family Guy Universe. My third argument is that: (3) Atheism can still be a consistent belief in the presence of Brian’s experiences. My fourth argument is that:(4) Cognitive dissonance is a weak explanatory hypothesis. We have no psychological data to conclude the presence of cognitive dissonanceNow, it is important to make the distinction between conflicting beliefs and cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is NOT the state of holding conflicting beliefs, but rather it is a theory that seeks to describe the feeling of discomfort associated with holding two or more conflicting cognitions. For instance, Dictionary. com defines cognitive dissonance as follows: Anxiety that results from simultaneously holding contradictory or otherwise incompatible attitudes, beliefs,or the like. .. This creates a pretty significant problem for my opponent as the careful reader has already observed. We are simply not equipped with the psychological data necessary for rendering a diagnosis of cognitive dissonance. For it may very well be true that Brian holds two or more conflicting experiences/beliefs, but without incumbent experiences of arousal or discomfort, cognitive dissonance is a premature diagnosis. Thus, the claim I make here is a very modest one. I maintain that the present corpus of Family Guy episodes does not yield any significant psychological data that would lend to the belief that Brian’s neural states are exhibiting arousal or discomfort with respect to conflicting cognitions. Without this material the resolution is inscrutable. But, one could possibly take this further and maintain that the conspicuous absence of the symptoms of discomfort most often associated with cognitive dissonance is strong evidence against the resolution. But we’ll allow the readers to see through the silence. Cognitive dissonance may not obtain In the Family Guy Universe. Living in the actual world, we can see that the Family Guy Universe represents a possible world. That is, though all of the things that take place within the Family Guy world are logically possible states of events, they do not represent actual states of affairs. For instance, teleport devices are possible (and can be made by talking infants) [1], dog’s can exhibit incredible IQ’s [2], the Family Guy universe itself takes place within the molecules of a lampshade [3], The grim reaper (or Death) allows clinically retarded individuals to fill in [4]. The list could go on ad nauseum. It is not at all clear that in this possible universe that the neural structures of the brain that allow for the existence of cognitive dissonance are the same. For instance, in this video (. http://www.youtube.com...) if you stop the video around the 7 second mark, you can see that the brain depicted here is markedly different than what one would find in the actual world. For instance, from this angel, one should be able to see the prominence of the two hemispheres via the longitudinal fissure. Moreover, the brainstem looks markedly different than a normal brainstem in actual reality, where a cerebellum should be easy to identify. These strongly suggest that the brains in the Family Guy universe cannot be rightfully subjected to cognitive dissonance studies that were formed and fashioned in the actual world. Even further, we have no cognitive dissonance material that addresses the brain states of the highly aberrant, intellectual canine. Thus, the modest claim I am making here, is simply that we have no good reasons for believing that cognitive dissonance theories that were formed in the actual world obtain in the possible world known as “The Family Guy Universe. ”Atheism can still be a consistent belief in the presence of Brian’s experiences. My third argument, like all the others, stands independently. As my opponent has already defined two possible forms of atheism, I will not do any of my own defining of the word here. However, as any careful reader may have already observed, there is nothing inherent in either of his listed definitions that omits the possibility of believing what we call in the actual world, “supernaturalism. ” Thus, a belief in miracles, heaven, hell, angels and any other positively supernatural event or entity is still perfectly consistent with the belief that there is no such thing as god(s). So Brian may consistently believe that all of the events he witnessed were orchestrated via some form of supernaturalism, without having to believe that God exists. In fact, if it is at all reliable to measure data from the actual world and compare it to this possible Family Guy universe, then we can look at many Buddhists who believe in supernatural events or entities yet nevertheless do not believe in a deity. Similarly, a study by The Barna Group showed that, “Half of all atheists and agnostics say that every person has a soul, that Heaven and Hell exist, and that there is life after death. [5]”Thus, my modest claim here is that there are very easy justifications that would allow for Brian to construct a consistent epistemic framework that could easily account for all of things he witnessed or heard from others without having to believe in god(s). Cognitive dissonance is a weak explanatory hypothesisThis point highlights my claim that cognitive dissonance is an incredibly weak explanatory hypothesis for the things that my opponent listed. For instance, Brian’s most noted exposition of his atheism takes place in the episode entitled, “Not All Dogs Go to Heaven. ” Here Meg’s born-again conversion to Christianity is hampered by Brian’s official coming-out as an atheist. Now this takes place in the 11th episode of the 7th season [6]. However, in season 8 episode 16 entitled, “April in Quahog,” Brian is caught praying by Stewie and then tries to deny it. We can conclude that Brian either (1) changed his atheism that he espoused in the 7th season. (2) Brian is a simple contrarian, wherein he likes to disagree with people and pretend to have beliefs that he does not actually possess. (3) Brian is not praying to a deity at all, or (4) Brian is exhibiting a very stark form of cognitive dissonance unlike any typical case. It could be (1), as Brian is fully capable of changing his beliefs if he is compelled (I think). I also like (2), as I experience plenty of people who simply either lie about their own beliefs or pretend to have beliefs they do not actually possess. (3) seems a little weird, because if Brian was not praying to a deity he would have no reason to pretend he was not praying. (4) is weak because Brian is not exhibiting any of the common responses to cognitive dissonance. In fact, being acutely aware of the contraction, as exhibited by his lying about it, shows that Brian probably does not actually believe in one of the claims/experiences that allow for the contradiction. 1. . http://tinyurl.com...2. . http://tinyurl.com...3. . http://tinyurl.com...4. . http://tinyurl.com...5. . http://tinyurl.com...6. . http://tinyurl.com...