well, perhaps it’s not the most authoritative source, but the article’s good: http://men.msn.com/articlees.aspx?cp-documentid=6564498>1=32001
Boiled down, you can either be truthful with yourself or happy. I try to be on the level with myself, which occasionally means I’m stuck with some major dissonance issues. No one is perfect, but until you really know someone, you’re really dealing with their polished "ambassador" alter ego. And to complicate matters further, the fundamental attribution error, the attribution of situational effects on a person’s actions to internal causes, tends to make people think of people in the wrong way.
All of this has to be adaptive. Otherwise, how would Elie Wiesel have written Night? If he had assessed the situation properly, he probably would have grabbed the closest SS guard’s sturmgewehr 44, shot a few Nazis and gone down in a hail of gunfire. Playing the probability game, that probably would have been a pretty wise course of action. Certainly for his father, that might have been a better plan than dying of dysentery.
Anyway, I see humans major, and perhaps only, driving force being the search for truth (i.e. scientific truth), and as such would rather see the truth than be blissfully oblivious. what say you to that?