Last time I looked up the definition of cognitive dissonance it was not anywhere close to what you are saying. I am not in conflict with something that I have always perceived to be true. I will still keep my Bruce. R. Lee In a message dated 12/29/2007 5:20:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, LRZeitlin writes: In a message dated 12/29/07 2:10:38 PM, Ownyacht writes: After anchoring from Key West to the Sassafras River this summer and in the rivers up to Knoxville last year, I'll keep my Bruce. Loyalty to one's choice of anchor is a perfect example of "cognitive dissonance." Before choosing an anchor, most boat owners are reasonably rational and objective. Or, given all the hype, folklore, and misinformation, at least as objective as anyone can be regarding the various assets and liabilities of each anchor type. But after the choice is made, any information regarding the advantage of another type of anchor, or any deficiency of the chosen anchor is disregarded lest one's personal judgment is called into question. Anchors similar to modern types of lightweight anchors have been used for over a century. The Bruce anchor is nearly 40 years old. While intended for anchoring oil platforms, it was adopted by boaters in the UK as a simpler and cheaper, but not necessarily better, alternative to the CQR plough. I was there when the Bruce was introduced to the recreational boating market and I know that it was never selected because of its holding power. Anyone who has tried to manhandle a plough to the foredeck in a choppy sea knows the advantages of the one piece Bruce. In fact, under most relatively benign inshore conditions, most anchor types provide adequate performance. If a specific anchor had a clearcut superiority, it would dominate the field. The fact is my local West Marine stocks many different styles and no one type significantly outsells the rest. This is a discussion to which there is no right answer. We all can't be right, nor can we all be wrong. The truly rational boater, of which I am not one, would carry at least three different kinds of anchor and select the one appropriate to the conditions. Alas, I am of the one type fits all persuasion. Happy New Year. Larry Z ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

> Last time I looked up the definition of cognitive dissonance it was not > anywhere close to what you are saying. I am not in conflict with something > that I > have always perceived to be true. I will still keep my Bruce. > OMG! Look how strong cognitive dissonance can be. Not only does it apply to anchors, but also applies to itself and the understanding of what cognitive dissonance is. >From http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm: "Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them." EG, "I believe that a xxx is a very good anchor. What? Its shank causes it to skip across the bottom? Oh am I in discomfort now." -- Jim Ague