Some beliefs but not all. It doesn't make sense that 10% would be adopted by the majority. If that were the case, we'd all be Jews, or Muslims or Mormons.

Sorry what? I smell manure. Allow me a little rant please

my thoughts are this is an overly simplistic conclusion and an far fetched extrapolation of a single "study" of group dynamics to population size proportions, made by math-head “social” researchers failing to explain anything. I smell yet another weak attempt of using mathematics to fabricate “hidden” social “laws”. The meaning of these kind of papers is mostly useless because correlations without theory don’t explain anything, nor does it support any theory I know of currently available. I ‘m not even sure where to look for such a theory, sociology – social psychology – history – mathematics maybe?

What exactly is “unshakable belief” and how have the researchers conceptualized and measured this? Does it cover all beliefs of all scopes and types? Unshakable belief is a priori irrational, meaning it is only indirectly “observable” by the researchers. I suspect a huge bias to be found here if I were to read the actual paper, which I don’t think is worth my time. How did they managed to create a meaningful aselect sample from this? For example how did the researchers come to the conclusion the people in their sample shared the same belief, why would this be meaningful for 1 let alone all societies, and how is this in any way explaining why and how all other people adopt these irrational beliefs "and spread it even further". In short, what’s the explanation behind this implied tipping point? Network –effects? How, which?

Then…an example:
“As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. "In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks."
similar process? What process? I have a hard time thinking this example was given by researchers. No scientist can be this stupid to correlate “a tipping point of a number of unshakable held beliefs in society and the events in Egypt and Tunisia. Are they really implying that suddenly after “Mohammed the 10th percentile” developed his unshakable belief, a tsunami of shit hit the van and dictators were thrown out because of that?

What about alternative explanations, prisoner’s dilemma? snow-ball effect?

It’s also plainly obvious it matters which part of the population - if it’s even possible to define that part in the first place - hold a “unshakable belief to have effect for the rest of the population. In general people referred to as “the elite” tend to influence the opinions and beliefs of the rest of the populace – top down, with an occasional revolutionary movement.

But in general, beliefs, in the form of customs and regulations, drip down from the bold and the beautiful, the rich and the powerful from government buildings and castles into the city and onto the countryside. Historically this process is well described by Norbert Elias’ Civilization process. I read nowhere they controlled their measurements for status and power variables for the people in their sample...

I’ll stop.

What happens if two different groups of people, each comprising 10% of the population, hold mutually exclusive unshakeable beliefs?

Arcanyn wrote:What happens if two different groups of people, each comprising 10% of the population, hold mutually exclusive unshakeable beliefs?

Or how about when there's a clean 10-90 split? Does the 90% suddenly realize they've been wrong all this time and change en masse to the point of view of the 10%?
What if it's more of a gradual thing? At some point, the point of view initially supported by 90% of the population must only be supported by the 10% that is least inclined to change views. But then, the 10-90 splits is in favour of the idea that was loosing support, according to these researchers?

Or how about when there's a clean 10-90 split? Does the 90% suddenly realize they've been wrong all this time and change en masse to the point of view of the 10%?

I'm sure the researchers don't have an answer. I'm also sure they're convinced to have found sometyhing indicating something hidden and valuable