world. I can’t afford to doubt. I have to believe. And there isn’t any
other truth.
Imagine the corner in which Dr. Armstrong and his followers found
themselves as morning approached. So massive was the commitment
to their beliefs that no other truth was tolerable. Yet that set of beliefs
had just taken a merciless pounding from physical reality: No saucer
had landed, no spacemen had knocked, no flood had come, nothing
had happened as prophesied. Since the only acceptable form of truth
had been undercut by physical proof, there was but one way out of the
corner for the group. They had to establish another type of proof for
the validity of their beliefs: social proof.
This, then, explains their sudden shift from secretive conspirators to
zealous missionaries. And it explains the curious timing of the
shift—precisely when a direct disconfirmation of their beliefs had
rendered them least convincing to outsiders. It was necessary to risk
the scorn and derision of the nonbelievers because publicity and recruit-
ment efforts provided the only remaining hope. If they could spread
the Word, if they could inform the uninformed, if they could persuade
the skeptics, and if, by so doing, they could win new converts, their
threatened but treasured beliefs would become truer. The principle of
social proof says so: The greater the number of people who find any
idea correct, the more the idea will be correct. The group’s assignment
was clear; since the physical evidence could not be changed, the social
evidence had to be. Convince and ye shall be convinced!^6
CAUSE OF DEATH: UNCERTAIN(TY)
All the weapons of influence discussed in this book work better under
some conditions than under others. If we are to defend ourselves ad-
equately against any such weapon, it is vital that we know its optimal
operating conditions in order to recognize when we are most vulnerable
to its influence. In the case of the principle of social proof, we have
already had a hint of one time when it works best. Among the Chicago
believers, it was a sense of shaken confidence that triggered their craving
for converts. In general, when we are unsure of ourselves, when the
situation is unclear or ambiguous, when uncertainty reigns, we are
most likely to look to and accept the actions of others as correct.
In the process of examining the reactions of other people to resolve
our uncertainty, however, we are likely to overlook a subtle but import-
ant fact. Those people are probably examining the social evidence, too.
Especially in an ambiguous situation, the tendency for everyone to be
looking to see what everyone else is doing can lead to a fascinating
98 / Influence