There's a simple trick that allows professionals in a given field to change their minds about something fundamental in their field - basically, it's the Feynman

There's a simple trick that allows professionals in a given field to change their minds about something fundamental in their field - basically, it's the Feynman approach, where he trained himself to accept the data and analysis even if he didn't like the result, from an aesthetic viewpoint or whatever. A key strategy here is to have something else to put your ego and emotions into, such as a very subjective area like art, music, literature, etc. Politics and religion might be trickier, as people tend to have external forcing factors (family and work opinions) that respond negatively to a fundamental change of some sort or other, up to being sent to prison for a decade for apostasy (see Saudi Arabia). In such situations, even if people do change their minds, they may not broadcast that change to anyone over fear of retaliation at family gatherings or in workplace environments. Even in cases where a particular member of a political party or religious group is shown to be criminally corrupt, many people will still embrace the politics or religion, on the basis that the individual in question is an outlier, not a representative sample - even after dozens of such examples are exposed. (Practically, this is why I've made it a rule to avoid political or religious discussions at work or at family gatherings, there's just not much value to be found there).