Final answer:
Brandtstädter asserts that ignoring evidence of declines or blaming external factors is an example of 'motivated reasoning,' a form of cognitive bias where people believe what they want and dismiss evidence to the contrary. It is related to the confirmation bias and self-serving attributions, impacting critical thinking and acceptance of responsibility.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to Brandtstädter, a person who ignores evidence of declines or blames it on something else is said to be engaging in motivated reasoning. This is a kind of cognitive bias where individuals embrace information that aligns with their desires and beliefs while disregarding any evidence that might challenge those beliefs. It's a natural human tendency to seek confirmation for our preconceived notions, and it can lead to a refusal to acknowledge what the facts and evidence indicate. For instance, if someone believes that "Gun control makes us safer," they may only look for evidence that supports this belief and ignore any data that contradicts it.
Motivated reasoning is also related to other cognitive biases such as the confirmation bias where we specifically look for information that supports our existing beliefs or stereotypes. People might make self-serving attributions for outcomes, attributing successes to internal factors like their own abilities or hard work, and failures to external factors beyond their control. This pattern of thinking helps maintain one's self-esteem and worldview but can also lead to a lack of critical thinking and failure to accept responsibility for one's actions. Recognizing and understanding motivated reasoning is important in developing critical thinking skills and epistemic humility.