I'd suggest that there is a fourth stage after Brennan's "What you believe": "What you feel". What we feel, of course, is variable and subject to our own shifting moods and inclinations, and more importantly to external persuasion - sometimes itself motivated by sincere conviction, sometimes by cynical deception and emotional manipulation.
And the tactic of "flooding the zone" with contradictory, confusing, and outrage-inducing claims does dual duty: not only does it try to sway those whose moral compass is already run by their in-the-moment sympathies, but it also fosters suspicion about principled belief itself, tailoring fictional or distorted narratives precisely at the fault lines of sincerely held convictions in attempt to undermine not only a specific conviction, but the legitimacy of holding conviction.
I'd suggest that there is a fourth stage after Brennan's "What you believe": "What you feel". What we feel, of course, is variable and subject to our own shifting moods and inclinations, and more importantly to external persuasion - sometimes itself motivated by sincere conviction, sometimes by cynical deception and emotional manipulation.
And the tactic of "flooding the zone" with contradictory, confusing, and outrage-inducing claims does dual duty: not only does it try to sway those whose moral compass is already run by their in-the-moment sympathies, but it also fosters suspicion about principled belief itself, tailoring fictional or distorted narratives precisely at the fault lines of sincerely held convictions in attempt to undermine not only a specific conviction, but the legitimacy of holding conviction.