Who has deceived thee as often as thyself? -Ben Franklin
Genuine self-deception pertains to such grand desires (e.g., vanity, religion, optimism) that can be satisfied simply by believing that they are satisfied. In short, self-deception is simply a matter of desire-motivated belief or wishful thinking; in self-deception one satisfies a desire through holding a belief. – Greg Bahnsen
[Editor’s Note: This is why it is often suggested the TV should be unplugged. A constant diet of TV and film changes the way we think. Story structure for screen is built on speculation, if even for the sake of length. Every detail cannot be included. The viewers never have full details even in a complete scene. Imagination fills in easily enough as we speculate about full meaning of what we’ve just seen. We are lead to believe certain things all the while speculating about the outcome. Screen writers know this. It’s what makes for a good ending. They must deliver according to our speculations but in a surprising and fulfilling way. Critical thinking skills are not required. Now current writers leave out honest character development all together. Also it is common practice to throw out established character for the sake of agenda. One season you have a stable consistent worldview honest and keeping with the character’s belief system, even atheist characters are true to character. But in the next season the same character is suddenly inconsistent with his established worldview, drawing completely different conclusions, unnaturally, and unrealistically. TV and film has taught us we have no absolutes. Ideas and people can not be trusted. We have feasted on a diet of spin and can no longer reason or makes sense of reality. Realistically even unbelievers are consistent in their worldview creatures of habit following the same patterns of sin and failure. Not so in the imaginary world of news and sexual politics scripted for a culture of people drunk on narrative thanks to Hollywood.]
[S]ame-sex marriage is popularly presented as nothing more than an extension of the marriage franchise. This idea borrows its strength not from a philosophical inquiry into the nature of marriage and human sexuality, but from an uncritical familiarity with the status quo and an equally uncritical imagination of a new one. In other words, many people imagine, and are encouraged to imagine, that same-sex marriage is simply bringing homosexual partnerships “on board” with existing heterosexual marriages. Imagination can thereby combine reassuring elements of the familiar past with strikingly different novelties and reforms of the future, a combination that careful analysis cannot endorse.
Imagination can gloss over a multitude of inconsistencies and logical conflicts, and its emotive sway can draw our attention away from critical details.
Read the rest here