I have already mentioned that the human mind, non-linear, noncommutative, is equipped with a range of reality assessment, learning, self-development and cooperation systems studied and described by behaviorists. How does it cope with the conflict resulting from the conviction in the rightness of executing one of two mutually exclusive activities aimed at achieving the goal? This is shown by studies co-conducted by Drew Westen, an American neuropsychologist, and described by him in the book The Political Brain(62). These studies, carried out with the use of fRMI (functional magnetic resonance imaging), were performed to illustrate the functioning of the mind of persons convinced about the legitimacy of the actions of their political tribe, their group reference point. In the minds of the politically decisive subjects, at the moment of showing them on subsequent slides information leading to an explicit contradiction of the direction of the presented way of thinking supported by them, the first examined reaction was the appearance of negative emotions. The second – suppressing negative emotions through an intense search for an explanation of contradictions. The third – launching the reward system for overcoming contradictions, when System 2, the Rider, found – even stretched, twisted and logically breakneck – the justification for the rightness of actions consistent with tribal identification to which emotions appealed.

Commitment towards own beliefs and intuitions, enhanced with identification with the group, comes with a great, difficult to overestimate strength. Jonathan Haidt, a psychologist of morality, in his book The Righteous Mind proves on the basis of his research that people have innate foundations and moral tastes that have been built during the evolutionary adaptations of our minds(63). These foundations allow people to group, unite around ideas, take stance in case of conflicts, including political ones. We perceive the world involving these innate, individually calibrated foundations and moral preferences. These are the following concepts: Care as opposed to Harm, Fairness as opposed to Cheating, Loyalty versus Betrayal, Authority versus Subversion, and Sancity versus Degradation. Haidt proves that we are born with certain types of sensitivity, preferring certain tastes and moral foundations to others. People – born with certain predispositions that encourage them to support similar views – are not homogenous. This can lead to maintaining conflicts, remaining in the situation of supporting one of the apparently exclusive activities that seem to lead to the achievement of the goal – political, business, individual one.

Curiosity is a sufficient condition to find a solution – as a common denominator for people looking for a way to transform a conflict into a dilemma that can be solved without stirring unnecessary emotions.

In such a case, what can become a common denominator that allows finding a solution in a situation of choice between mutually exclusive activities that have their declared supporters strengthened with the sense of being right and backed by the group? Asheley Landrum in the collaborative article „Science Curiosity and Political Information Processing,” published in 2017 in Advances in Political Psychology book series, says that this is curiosity of science (I quote from Michael Shermer and his columns „(Can’t Get No) Satisfaction” published in Scientific American(64)). That is the motivation to search and acquire scientific information for personal satisfaction. So, while clearing this utterance of political references, the common denominator allowing to find a solution to the conflict – despite the individual emotions related to attachment to own intuitions or emotions associated with group support – is curiosity and seeking valuable information for personal satisfaction.

Curiosity is a sufficient condition to find a solution – as a common denominator for people looking for a way to transform a conflict into a dilemma that can be solved without stirring unnecessary emotions. Yet, it is required to reconsider the education system in order to achieve a new quality of effective search for solutions – those that improve the functioning of complex systems driven by the ever growing accumulation of knowledge and speed of information exchange.