{
  "article": "<section class=\"plain-english-door\" aria-label=\"Introduction\">\n  <p class=\"plain-english-door__kicker\">Answer packet</p>\n  <h3>Failed-expectation repair is real; it still has to explain the shape of the claim.</h3>\n  <p class=\"plain-english-door__lead\">Groups sometimes reinterpret failure rather than abandon hope. That is serious pressure. This answer packet asks why a disappointed messianic group would repair failure specifically through bodily resurrection proclamation, public witness, and worship of Jesus rather than through a thinner vindication claim.</p>\n</section>\n\n<div class=\"detail-section-heading\">Observation</div>\n<div class=\"detail-article-block\">\n<p><strong>Cognitive dissonance can explain reinterpretation, but not every reinterpretation has the same shape.</strong> A crucified Messiah created real expectation shock. The question is whether failed-expectation repair alone predicts an early claim about bodily resurrection, named witnesses, public proclamation, Paul, James, and Jesus' exalted identity.</p>\n<p>This row does not add direct Resurrection proof. It modestly pressures the cognitive-dissonance alternative seat.</p>\n</div>\n\n<div class=\"detail-section-heading\">What This Answers</div>\n<div class=\"detail-article-block\">\n<ul>\n<li>It answers the claim that failed-expectation repair is enough once reinterpretation is possible.</li>\n<li>It focuses on the bodily and public shape of the earliest claim.</li>\n<li>It supports bounded alternative-collapse credit only against the cognitive-dissonance hypothesis.</li>\n</ul>\n</div>\n\n<div class=\"detail-section-heading\">What This Does Not Answer</div>\n<div class=\"detail-article-block\">\n<ul>\n<li>It does not deny cognitive dissonance as a real human mechanism.</li>\n<li>It does not prove the Resurrection event.</li>\n<li>It does not explain every witness or Gospel narrative detail.</li>\n<li>It does not cancel mixed models involving vision, social memory, Scripture, and group repair.</li>\n</ul>\n</div>\n\n<div class=\"detail-section-heading\">Bayesian Meaning</div>\n<div class=\"detail-article-block\">\n<p>This is a paired <code>defeater_answer</code> row for <code>E-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE-REINTERPRETATION</code>. It gives small capped pressure against <code>H-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE</code>: <strong>-0.030 log10BF</strong>. It intentionally carries no direct <code>H-RESURRECTION</code> Bayes factor.</p>\n</div>\n\n<div class=\"detail-section-heading\">Caveats</div>\n<div class=\"detail-article-block\">\n<ul>\n<li>Do not mock failed-expectation repair. It happens.</li>\n<li>Do not use this row as cheap positive Resurrection proof.</li>\n<li>Keep mixed naturalistic models visible.</li>\n</ul>\n</div>",
  "axioms": [
    "A6",
    "A7"
  ],
  "bayes_factors": {
    "H-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE": {
      "log10BF": -0.03,
      "bf_min": -0.05,
      "bf_max": -0.005,
      "rationale": "The bodily, public, witness-shaped resurrection proclamation modestly pressures cognitive-dissonance-only explanations, while leaving failed-expectation repair and mixed models live."
    }
  },
  "bf_status": "ready",
  "category": "Defeater Answers",
  "citations": [
    "1 Corinthians 15:3-8.",
    "Leon Festinger, Henry W. Riecken, and Stanley Schachter, When Prophecy Fails (University of Minnesota Press, 1956).",
    "Dale C. Allison Jr., The Resurrection of Jesus: Apologetics, Polemics, History (Bloomsbury, 2021).",
    "N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Fortress, 2003).",
    "Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (IVP Academic, 2010)."
  ],
  "counts_in_cache": true,
  "evidence_id": "E-ANS-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE-BODILY-SHAPE",
  "visual_asset": {
    "src": "assets/evidence-viewer/evidence-images/cognitive_dissonance_and_bodily_proclamation.png",
    "title": "Bodily proclamation as a partial answer to cognitive-dissonance explanations visual overview",
    "alt": "AI-generated comparative visualization for Bodily proclamation as a partial answer to cognitive-dissonance explanations. Illustrative only, not experimental data.",
    "caption": "AI-generated conceptual / comparative visualization ? illustrative only, not experimental data. Presented inside a Christian evidence map. Partial answer / comparative pressure; not standalone proof.",
    "width": 1448,
    "height": 1086
  },
  "hypothesis_ref": [
    "H-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE"
  ],
  "last_updated": "2026-05-28T00:00:00Z",
  "major_category": "History",
  "metadata": {
    "answer_status": "partial_answer",
    "canonical_anchor": "E-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE-REINTERPRETATION",
    "cap_eligible": true,
    "cap_exempt_reason": null,
    "cap_family": "resurrection_rival_pressure",
    "cap_notes": "Paired answer to cognitive-dissonance pressure. It may contribute only bounded alternative-collapse support and must not be routed as direct Resurrection evidence.",
    "cap_profile": "rival_pressure",
    "category": "Defeater Answers",
    "counts_as_direct_christ_identity": false,
    "counts_as_direct_logos_synthesis": false,
    "counts_as_direct_resurrection": false,
    "defeater_family": "resurrection_alternative",
    "defeater_target": [
      "H-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE"
    ],
    "dependency_cluster": "resurrection_alternatives",
    "dependency_cluster_id": "resurrection_alternatives",
    "dependency_cluster_label": "Resurrection alternative explanations",
    "dependency_cluster_role": "counter",
    "dependency_role": "counter",
    "dependency_weight_class": "semi_independent",
    "directness": "supporting",
    "evidence_function": "defeater_answer",
    "governance_reviewed": "2026-05-28",
    "last_updated": "2026-05-28",
    "major_category": "History",
    "paired_defeater": "E-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE-REINTERPRETATION",
    "rev": 1,
    "scoring_note": "Small capped pressure against H-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE only. No direct H-RESURRECTION BF.",
    "source_status": "source_review_pending",
    "sub_category": "Resurrection Alternatives"
  },
  "positive_apologetic": {
    "label": "Partial answer",
    "title": "Repairing failure is not the same as explaining this repair.",
    "key_point": "Failed-expectation repair is real, but the earliest Christian claim took a specific bodily, public, witness-shaped form.",
    "conversation_move": "Grant dissonance. Then ask why repair moved toward resurrection from the dead rather than only symbolic vindication or continued mission.",
    "caveat": "This is not direct Resurrection proof. It is a bounded answer to one rival explanation."
  },
  "scripture_passage": "1 Corinthians 15:3-8; 1 Corinthians 15:12-28",
  "source_note": "Pair with E-ALT-COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE-REINTERPRETATION. Keep cognitive-dissonance mechanism visible and test it against the shape of the earliest claim.",
  "status": "active",
  "sub_category": "Resurrection Alternatives",
  "summary": "Datum: failed-expectation repair must explain why the early Christian reinterpretation became bodily resurrection proclamation rather than thinner vindication language.",
  "tags": [
    "Defeater-Answer",
    "Resurrection-Alternatives",
    "Cognitive-Dissonance",
    "Scored"
  ],
  "tilt": "negative",
  "title": "Bodily proclamation as a partial answer to cognitive-dissonance explanations",
  "type": "atomic"
}