Brian Griffin is cognitively dissonant in regards to religion

We have no psychological data to conclude the presence of cognitive dissonanceSocialpinko maintains that we essentially have exceptionally good epistemic access to the psychological state of Brian by virtue of his behavior as demonstrated in his praying and lying as displayed in the video. I would counter that this is actually an exceptionally good example of socialpinko displaying what is called confirmation bias. This is a type of selective thinking whereby a person selects only the apparent facts that confirm his/her prior inferences. This can be seen by what my opponent must ASSUME prior to affirming the existence of cognitive dissonance: (1) cognitive dissonance theories obtain in the family guy universe; (2) these cognitive dissonance theories can be applied without qualification to anthropomorphic dogs; (3) the psychological condition of anxiety as measured by cortisol obtains in that moment; (4) Brian both has an anterior cingulated cortex and an anterior insular cortex that were signaling conflict (5) other explanatory hypothesis are wrong (e.g. self-perception theory). This list could be made longer but I'll need the space.Now, I can grant the first two assumptions in this argument so as to allow my second argument to stand independently, but the others I cannot. We literally have no access to the neural states of Brain that are unilaterally responsible for Brian's behavior. His behavior is in no way unique to cognitive dissonance theories! If my mom caught me masturbating I would express a very similar response that Brian did, but not because of conflicting cognitions! I simply maintain that we do not have enough psychological access to Brain's brain states or cortisol balance to maintain the actual instantiation of a theory that is itself questioned in the actual world. For more on why the video of Brain does not confirm my opponent's inference, see my 4th argument.Cognitive dissonance may not obtain In the Family Guy Universe.My opponent argues that this premise lacks force because cognitive dissonance is not a theory dealing with neural states, but with behavioral states. He also says that my suppositions lead to absurd conclusions, because, of course, cerebellums are needed for motor skills and it would be patently absurd to think that they don't have motor skills.First, behavior just is the expression of certain neural states and thus has almost everything to do with the brain. Behavior alone offers very weak evidence when it comes to the currency of science. The verity of this claim is measured by being able to replicate behavior without replicating any of the conditions necessary for cognitive dissonance (think actors, video games, etc). For instance, anxiety is a psychological condition caused by the zona fasciculate of the adrenal gland which is ultimately controlled by the brain's hypothalamus [1]. Thus, if we have good reasons for believing that the brains of the Family Guy universe are not compositely the same as those in the actual world, we have no way of determining the existence of cognitive dissonance. Furthermore, the very fact that these Family Guy characters can operate with motor skills without any visible cerebellum is positive evidence that their brains are completely functionally and structurally different than the brains of the actual world. My opponent simply mistakes physical possibility with logical possibility when dealing with the Family Guy universe (think modal logic). It is actually this wrong-thinking that would lead to absurd conclusions, given that the laws of physics and other physical states that govern our universe have been repeatedly shown not to obtain in the Family Guy universe [2][3][4].Atheism can still be a consistent belief in the presence of Brian's experiences.My opponent maintains that I'm guilty of misrepresenting Brain's experiences. This is positively false. I fully admit that Brian saw a man claiming to be Jesus performing miracles. I did not assume, like he, that this person is therefore God. It is true that Christianity maintains the deity of Christ, but Brian would not be irrational for denying that, even given the apparent supernatural events for which this person instantiated. I found it ironic, too, that my opponent thinks that it would be irrational for Brian to deny supposedly reliable second-hand testimony of the existence of God. As a theologian myself, there is no shortage of otherwise rational people doing just that in the actual world. I simply maintain that supernatural explanations could account for the events that Brian both saw and apparently heard second-hand (though second-hand testimony is an argument from complete silence). Brian can still justifiably deny the divinity of Christ and the presence of some sort of God figure. Remember the framework for which this all takes place, too. Brian is used to crazy things happening and shows himself to be superstitious when he pleads with Peter not to profane the skull of a Native American skull found in the backyard (see sn: 4 ep: 26 wherein the following supernatural events occur and Brian is present: paranormal furniture movement, talking tv static, Peter rips his face off to reveal someone else's face) [5]. The ironic thing is that it was actually Brian who tried to convince Lois that they had a Poltergeist! Thus, it seems that Brian believes in supernaturalism but denies the existence of a deity. With supernaturalism at his epistemic disposal and the inherent craziness of the possible Family Guy universe that he occupies, all of the events that he has witnessed and heard can be rationally consistent.Cognitive dissonance is a weak explanatory hypothesisHere my opponent tries to assert that Brian actually did exhibit cognitive dissonance and that the other hypotheses can be discarded out-of-hand for lack of evidence. This is absurd, of course, as my hypotheses have equal explanatory scope and equal evidence to the hypothesis of cognitive dissonance. This is simply another example of my opponent's confirmation bias. My opponent suggests that cognitive dissonance is "particularly evident in situations where an individual's behavior conflicts with beliefs that are integral to his or her self-identity." This fails to see that all of my listed hypotheses would also be "particularly evident" under similar and undiscernibly different circumstances. A gay person lying about his sexual identity is "particularly evident" in situations where his behavior conflicts with the beliefs he told others he held. In fact, in situations where no evidence beyond the presence of a conflict of belief and behavior, I maintain that it is prima facie more likely that an individual of above average intelligence is lying rather than displaying cognitive dissonance (like the gay example).Moreover, the hypothesis of cognitive dissonance actually proves very weak in the circumstance in question because Brian does NOT show any signs of reduction that are said to follow from cognitive dissonance. He would know that he was praying and he would know that this conflicts with his supposed atheism. Festinger, the proprietor of the theory, maintained that people would take measures of changing beliefs or behaviors or acquiring new information to increase consonance (I am aware of no such steps towards reduction through the Family Guy series) [6]. Furthermore, and perhaps generally worse for the theory of cognitive dissonance proper, is that the theory as a whole is less parsimonious to other well-known psychological phenomena. In fact, it seems to simply be an unneeded assumption to be shed by Occam's razor, given that all of the psychological data can be attributed to well-known psychological theories of communal reinforcement, confirmation bias, self-deception, subjective validation, and/or etc.Sources1. http://tinyurl.com...2. /watch?v=BLoIA5SP7pA3. /watch?v=fqs9DYisSsg4. /watch?v=1KFAi07A1Ts5. http://tinyurl.com...6. http://tinyurl.com...