Why people stick to their views despite evidence to the contrary?

More, why do they stick to their views fanatically especially when there is evidence to the contrary?

From the little I have read on the subject, the explanation seems to lie in our perception of “self”. Our views are an essential part of what we perceive as our “self” and an attack on the views is considered as an attack on the “self”. Therefore, we counterattack.

To reinforce the sense of “self” we stick to like minded people, read and watch only what confirms our prejudices and revel on the trashing of the “opponents”.

This must be a “bug” of our mental apparatus. Because, in the course of time, we change views anyway. Only never when we are told so. So we change “self” and disprove the importance of having this specific view or the other.

But in the short term we consider our views as “eternal” because this serves well the “selfishness” of this plastic thing called “ the self”. Maybe this is what led Buddha to proclaim that the “self” is an illusion.

How do we fix this “bug”? This is an open question. My personal experience leads me to believe that it happens more easily in non-confrontational situations. More likely when you are reading a book, or watching a documentary, than when you are discussing with another person.

Which shifts the problem to “how one picks the right book/documentary/experience etc” that would help him to fix his views?

In essence, we never “pick”. Like the social media maxim goes, the “news” find us. And it is precisely into this modern space, the social media space, that it gets easier to pick up new views provided that they just “flow” around you and not directed at you. At least, I think so.