I strongly suspect the things people believe in are usually just what they instinctively feel is right; the excuses, the justifications, the things you're supposed to argue about, come later. They're the least important part of the belief. That's why you can destroy them, win an argument, prove the other person wrong, and still they believe what they did in the first place.
In Iain M. Banks' "Use of Weapons," the author expresses skepticism about the foundation of people's beliefs. He suggests that most beliefs arise from instinctive feelings rather than rational arguments. The reasons and justifications people create to defend their beliefs come afterward and are secondary to the emotional core of their convictions.
This perspective illustrates that even when someone is confronted with logical evidence that contradicts their beliefs, they often cling to those beliefs regardless. The core of belief seems to be rooted in personal sentiment, making rational discussion less impactful. Thus, arguments may fail to change minds if they do not address the underlying emotional connection.
