When reality challenges our beliefs, we don't change our beliefs - we find ways to reinterpret reality.

Cognitive dissonance is the mental equivalent of physical pain - it signals that something is wrong and demands resolution.

The more we invest in a belief, the more desperately we'll defend it against contradictory evidence.

We are not rational beings who occasionally rationalize; we are rationalizing beings who occasionally think rationally.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool when your identity is tied to your beliefs.

It's easier to change what you do than to change what you believe about what you do.

The mind would rather invent a reason than admit a contradiction. We are storytelling machines, not truth-seeking ones.

When actions and beliefs conflict, we don't change our actions - we change our interpretation of our actions.

The greater the sacrifice, the more we need to believe the sacrifice was worthwhile.

We don't see things as they are; we see them as we need them to be to maintain our self-concept.

The most dangerous beliefs are those we've suffered for - we'll defend them to the death because to abandon them would mean our suffering was meaningless.

Dissonance resolution often involves not changing our minds, but finding new reasons to keep our old minds.

The human brain is a master of post-hoc rationalization. We decide first, then find reasons for our decisions.

When faced with contradictory information, the mind has three choices: change the belief, change the information, or find a way to make them compatible.

We are more committed to being consistent than to being right. The appearance of consistency matters more than actual truth.

The pain of cognitive dissonance is proportional to the importance of the belief and the strength of the contradictory evidence.

We don't abandon our beliefs because they're wrong; we abandon them when they become too expensive to maintain.

The mind protects its beliefs like a fortress, with rationalization as its strongest wall.

When reality contradicts our worldview, we don't question our worldview - we question reality's validity.

The more intelligent the person, the more sophisticated their rationalizations for maintaining contradictory beliefs.

We resolve dissonance not by seeking truth, but by seeking comfort in our existing mental models.

The ultimate cognitive dissonance is knowing that we are prone to cognitive dissonance while believing we are immune to it.

We would rather be consistently wrong than inconsistently right. Certainty feels better than accuracy.

The mind's immune system protects cherished beliefs from contradictory evidence, often by attacking the evidence rather than updating the beliefs.

Cognitive dissonance reveals that we are not truth-seekers but meaning-makers, and we prefer comforting meanings over uncomfortable truths.