Suppose, for example, a group of 5 12-year-olds are, after a fine meal outside, discussing about the relation of one's blood type to one's academic results. One of them, let us call him A, has had a long-standing belief that there is a similarity between one's blood type and one's grades. Indeed, his own blood group is A and he has been consistently been scoring As for the length of his education so far. He articulates his thoughts with pride. A female, let us call her AB, gives him a high-five and echoes him, because she has noticed that she has consistently been scoring As and Bs in school so far--and her blood type is AB.
2 of the others, let us call them N1 and N2, nod their heads with detatched interest. N1 reflects upon his own blood type and his grades and realises that there
is some truth in the belief that onr's blood type reflects one's academic grades. He notices some inconsistencies from his own experience but does not think too much into them. N2 sits passively, taking everything in and passing an occasional comment, but, like N1, never bothers to dwelve too much into the issue; very soon his thoughts drift to dessert, a prospect that silences him for the rest of the conversation.
The remaining fellow, let us call him KC, is also generally silent throughout the conversation, but, unlike N2, he is not thinking about dessert. He is thinking about A and AB's proposition, or belief, that there is some kind of link between one's blood type and academic grades. To be specific, he feels rather indignant about the presumptous attitude of A and AB, which is worsened by their irrational take on things. But he does not say much, he holds back his retorts, he holds back his cards even though he knows he has a good chance of winning the round. He does so not because he cannot be bothered, or because dessert is coming soon, even though both are more than valid reasons for disrupting the conversation. He does so because he has been thinking about the issue ever since he was 7, and in so doing, has thought about the discrepancy "O' blood group people would have if what A and AB say is true-- for surely no one he has seen has ever scored an O or zero before, not least himself (he belongs to the "O" group too). This discrepancy works as a good argument for refutation of the argument, of course, yet he is hesitant because if--what if--people with blood type "O" share another kind of similarity in their lives, say of always making zero careless mistakes or zero grammatical errors in their work, for example. KC has realised this from age 7, and he has been stumped ever since. He realises that he has the ace of diamonds in his hand but he cannot be sure if other players have other aces in their own hands. He realises he must do more research first, and let the other players take the intiative. The very wisdom that compels him to refute their belief also at the same time compels him to refute his own--because he knows he needs more knowledge, he needs to be a very mature person before he can start to gamble.
Let us now examine A and AB further. We look at A first. Might his be a case of hopeless self-affirmation? Ie He, for some indiscernible reason (perhaps his parents inculcated it in him, or perhaps he read from a certain Book before), believed that blood types have a direct link to results. Hence, since he know he is an A, could he have subconsciously worked toward that end and fulfil his own prophecy? (Alternatively, he could have just been born smart) And the moment he scored his first A, he told himself that the link is real, thus giving him the confidence and strength he needs to achieve his next A, and so on. Through years of consistency, though years of self-proven belief, would he be prone to dismiss any single other grade he has gotten along the way, thinking up expedient excuses for those hiccoughs the same way the first A gave him an expedient excuse to affirm his own belief?
What of AB then? Could her case be an issue of probability? She heard what A said, and in looking back to find evidence for his proposition, wouldnt it be easy for her to find many As and Bs to fit into her blood type, especially if she is decently intelligent, especially when lower-grade schooling is relatively simpler?
What if A's first few tests had all been Bs and Cs? Would he have abandoned his belief? I am of the opinion he wouldnt. He would simply shrug it off, and because his belief is so strong, his behavior and attitude would align themselves in such a way that an A would be presented to him sooner or later, after which he would start to feel triumphant about his theory and ignore the other failed evidence. What if AB's blood type was, say, B, thus reducing this chance of "self-fitting"? Would A still be able to influence her over? I say it depends. It would depend on how critical a person "AB" is; and if that is the case we can surmise that AB's consequent belief is actually more a matter of luck than of faith.
