Cognitive dissonance self-diagnosis

[Davis]

The below text may help you determine if you suffer from cognitive dissonance.

According to Festinger (1957), the author of the theory cognitive dissonance, people hold a variety of beliefs of the world and themselves and when these beliefs are contradicted by observable information it creates an anxiety. However, to resolve this anxiety the habitual response in many people is not to alter their beliefs to confirm to the new information, but rather to alter or deny their observations so they can maintain their beliefs. For example, a single parent who suffered intense emotional turmoil after their only child was killed fighting in the 2003 Iraq war and who holds a belief that their child was fighting courageously for justice, freedom and peace and thus their death was not in vain, will have a tendency, according to the theory, to be dismissive of information which demonstrates the war was fought for oppression and exploitation. Moreover, if you the reader of the above example consider yourself not to confirm to gender based stereotypes, but you presumed that the single parent is a female or that the only child killed in the war was a male may begin to suffer from cognitive dissonance. This is because genders were not assigned in the above example, and thus any imposition of gender will have stemmed from the stereotypes you adhere to. To conclude, if you imposed gender stereotypes to define the characters in the above example yet maintain you do not adhere to such stereotypes it is highly probable you are currently suffering from cognitive dissonance.

[lavender27]

, do you have a stereo, I'd love to play my vinyls again.

[Davis]

lavender27 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> , do you have a stereo, I'd love to play my vinyls

> again.

No.

Do you have anything to say which is meaningful and related to the subject of cognitive dissonance, perhaps from your own experience?

[PeckhamRose]

You cite two points in a poorly written text. First, you talk of dissonance with an example of a parent proud of its child's death in a war in which said parent has a belief system, ie. maintaining that belief that it died for a good cause despite other points of view claiming it was a pointless war (in effect). Fine. So what. That is clearly what would happen. What parent of either gender would want to change their belief that their child had died pointlessly in a pointless war? I mean, such cognitive dissonance could kill through grief and shock. You would be devastated that your original belief was wrong or faulty, and that therefore it would have to follow that you would believe that your kid died pointlessly. It would be reasonable to continue with original belief out of ignorance but for the reason of self protection.

Secondly, your point about assuming gender. Well so what? Casting directors have done that for years and they are slowly coming round to learning to be gender blind and actually fighting any writer's description of, for example, a doctor as a male doctor when there is no reason in the script that said doctor should be male. What is a blind spot to many casters, is disability casting and race casting. If a writer writes "Doctor" then that doctor could be any human who could believably be a doctor. ie. an adult past the age of 28. The more examples of this we see, the more we see our world having more possibilities.

As far as self diagnosis is concerned, well again, so what? My experience is that I don't think I suffer from it, but maybe having worked as a playwright and actor, I am more sensitive to it.

The question is: why are you raising it here?

[lavender27]

Davis Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> lavender27 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > , do you have a stereo, I'd love to play my

> vinyls

> > again.

>

> No.

> Do you have anything to say which is meaningful

> and related to the subject of cognitive

> dissonance, perhaps from your own experience?

No, I have not ever heard of this description of diagnosis before, I have only just read your laboriously long text , I shall get back to you. Previous text was just a playful play on words, not so good though. We overthink ourselves sometimes, and conjour up some magical things about ourselves. Anyway what has brought you to write this?

[Sue]

PeckhamRose Wrote:

--------------------------------------------

>

> The question is: why are you raising it here?

I wondered this too.

Though it did bring back memories of a seminar on cognitive dissonance reduction I went to circa 1971 :))

[JohnL]

Brexit

Edit: Actually the (I thought) laughable Brexit Anxiety Disorder seems to be happening too.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-anxiety-disorder-britain-middle-class/

[Davis]

PeckhamRose, lavender27 and Sue I appreciate your input into the topic of cognitive dissonance. You all have questioned my rationale for raising this subject here and therefore I should address this. Firstly, I thought it would be of interest because cognitive dissonance is a factor which can affect our decisions adversely. Secondly, it goes someway to accounting for the denial of information which contradicts the decisions people make. A good example of this is the way people have denied objective and quantifiable evidence in the Brexit debate.

Taking into account Peckhamrose?s comment that my initial post was ?poorly written? and lavender27?s claim that it was ?laboriously long? I will now attempt to present the subject in manner that is hoped to be more engaging and has direct relevance to those who have commented so far.

Let us imagine there is a small theatre in East Dulwich which produces plays using the same actors, theatre manager and director but different playwrights. The theatre never advertises its productions beyond what is announced on its billboard. However, the system is uses to gauge if a particular play should continue is as follows: if the first night of the play does not manage to fill more than 50% of the available seats it will be cancelled and will not be given a second night showing. On the second night and thereafter if it does manage to fill more than 70% of available seats the show will be cancelled and a new production will be introduced. The reasoning behind this system is that anything below a 70% capacity means the theatre is at a financial loss. This rule is only broken on the first night to allow information on the production to circulate. The idea being, if the play is good then people from the first show will recommend it to their friends and the numbers should increase for subsequent shows. Also, a relevant point to note is the theatre is generally busier during the winter than in the summer months.

Peckhamrose writes a play which is directed by the theatre director, lavender27. The play?s opening night is on the first on the 1st of June and manages to fill 52% of available seats in the theatre. According to the theatre?s system it is allowed to be given a second show, but only manages to fill 40% of available seats. A meeting is held, lavender27, the director, states that the low intake was due to the play being poorly written and thus should not be given a third screening in accordance with the theatre?s system. Peckhamrose, the playwright, argues that the play was written well but the low intake was due to heavy rain on the night of the second show. Sue, the theatre manager, presents an offer to the playwright which is as follows: the play will be given a third show only if they personally cover any losses the theatre incurs due to a low intake.

What do you think Peckham rose will do, and why?

[dbboy]

cognitive dissonance

nounPSYCHOLOGY

the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change.

[Sue]

If anybody has managed to read to the end of Davis' last post, I take my hat off to them :))

It might have been easier if the paragraphs had been rather shorter ....

[TheArtfulDogger]

Davis Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Peckhamrose writes a play which is directed by the

> theatre director, lavender27. The play?s opening

> night is on the first on the 1st of June and

> manages to fill 52% of available seats in the

> theatre. According to the theatre?s system it is

> allowed to be given a second show, but only

> manages to fill 40% of available seats. A meeting

> is held, lavender27, the director, states that the

> low intake was due to the play being poorly

> written and thus should not be given a third

> screening in accordance with the theatre?s system.

> Peckhamrose, the playwright, argues that the play

> was written well but the low intake was due to

> heavy rain on the night of the second show. Sue,

> the theatre manager, presents an offer to the

> playwright which is as follows: the play will be

> given a third show only if they personally cover

> any losses the theatre incurs due to a low intake.

>

>

> What do you think Peckham rose will do, and why?

I think peckhamrose will tell lavender27 to go take a running jump and put the amazing play on at a more modern forward thinking theatre

Still not getting the point of your posts Davis , can you explain them in one or two very concise sentences or is that a challenge ?

[Sue]

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Still not getting the point of your posts Davis ,

> can you explain them in one or two very concise

> sentences or is that a challenge ?

Nor am I, and yes, rather less wordy posts might be helpful in attempting to get the point :)

[PeckhamRose]

Have you actually been to any of my plays? lolol I am not reading any more of this. Open a Facebook page to discuss it or something. Buh bye.

[Davis]

I started this thread to explain the theory of cognitive dissonance in the hope it would create an awareness of how habitual cognitive biases can affect perception. I have shared a similar text with my work colleagues and did not experience any issues with them comprehending the subject. In fact the initial post has an element of humour and irony that many of my colleagues identified. However, the initial reception I received here was one of contempt. For example, I was told my initial post was poorly written and laborious. Also, my motives for writing about this subject on this form were questioned. I find this peculiar because people, in the lounge, write on various topics without having to justify their motives.

What is interesting to note is that even when I was asked to simplify the idea by reducing it to a few short sentences this was done in a patronising manner. For example, theartfuldodger wrote ?still not getting the point of your posts Davis , can you explain them in one or two very concise sentences or is that a challenge?? It is perfectly acceptable to ask me to simplify the issue but why the need to patronise me?

I did attempt to make the issue more relevant by giving a theoretical situation that relates to Peckhmarose but despite this Peckhamrose took offence and told me ?open a Facebook page to discuss it or something?. I challenge anyone to justify Peckhamrose?s response.

On face value the hostile, dismissive and patronising reaction I got seems irrational. However, a way to account for this can be achieved by applying the theory of cognitive dissonance. It could the case that those who showed an unprovoked hostile, dismissive and patronising reaction may have done so because they had difficulty in comprehending the concept, but rather than accept this they attempted to change the situation (their failure to understand the concept) by blaming me and thus maintain their belief that they are not prone to such a failure. What is ironic is this reading of their behaviour can be used to further demonstrate the theory of cognitive dissonance. In this regard their reactions have merit. Conversely, another explanation of their behaviour may be simply due to poor manners.

I feel this is an important subject to discuss because the inherent biases we have can affect the most important decisions in our lives. It is an awareness of these biases that can help us overcome and avoid their negative effects.

[dbboy]

Maybe it has something to do with how you use the language, you may be an "expert" in this area, readers may not have come across, be aware or have knowledge / experience about the topic which you may have. If you write in a way that people find easy to read and understand the points you are trying to make, the reaction received may then be different.

[nxjen]

Davis - Have you read your own post?

?... people hold a variety of beliefs of the world and themselves and when these beliefs are contradicted by observable information it creates an anxiety. However, to resolve this anxiety the habitual response in many people is not to alter their beliefs to confirm to the new information, but rather to alter or deny their observations so they can maintain their beliefs.?

[Davis]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Maybe it has something to do with how you use the

> language, you may be an "expert" in this area,

> readers may not have come across, be aware or have

> knowledge / experience about the topic which you

> may have. If you write in a way that people find

> easy to read and understand the points you are

> trying to make, the reaction received may then be

> different.

dbboy I am no expert in this area, but it is an area I find interesting and wish to learn more about.

I accept my use of the English language can be improved greatly, but I do not understand how this would cause the reaction received. Why the need for a dismissive and patronising tone?

[Davis]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Davis - Have you read your own post?

>

> ?... people hold a variety of beliefs of the world

> and themselves and when these beliefs are

> contradicted by observable information it creates

> an anxiety. However, to resolve this anxiety the

> habitual response in many people is not to alter

> their beliefs to confirm to the new information,

> but rather to alter or deny their observations so

> they can maintain their beliefs.?

nxjen, even though the point you are making may be absolutely clear to yourself and others I was unable to comprehend it; therefore, please can you clarify it for me as I am sure it will add value to this discussion.

[dbboy]

that was niether dismissive and patronising

[Davis]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> that was niether dismissive and patronising

Sorry if what I wrote was confusing. I was not referring to you; I do not consider what you said to be dismissive or patronising. Rather it was very helpful. The comment about being dismissive and patronising was in reference to previous posts not yours.

[seenbeen]

People who 'belong' to a group or cult which has a well defined belief system will ignore any observed contradictions if it means they will be at odds with the beliefs of the group....the most extreme example is where apostasy is punishable by death....

[Davis]

Everyone belongs to a group in terms of their belief system and everyone has a code of morals. A problem is people do not always realize this. I am of the opinion that everyone has an ideology and it is impossible to function in this world without one. Ideologies and the narratives they produce aid us in understanding otherwise incomprehensible observations and events.

Regarding punishments for apostasy ( i.e. leaving a belief system for another) this does not necessary have anything to do with cognitive dissonance, but rather can be seen as a punishment for changing beliefs and the consequences it brings to that group. For example, consider a solider who changes sides during a war due to a change of ideology, but then is captured by the side he deserted and is executed.

Regardless, beliefs not only affect human perception but also form moral codes. The key for me is to acknowledge that people with different beliefs will have different morals.

[dbboy]

When you say everyone has an ideology, not sure what you mean by ideology, but if you mean values, then I agree with that. However I disagree with you when you say "that people with different beliefs will have different morals. It doesn't matter what colour, creed, age, gender, race or what ever other descriptive you want to insert, I would hope that everyone has morals, its just that some peoples morals are stronger than others, but that doesn't make them any less of a person.

[Davis]

What I mean by ideology is a belief system that affects our view of the world (e.g. Darwinism, Capitalism, Christianity, Atheism, Marxism and so on). Regarding people having different morals based on their beliefs, what I mean is people derive different morals from their beliefs. For example, someone who believes in a particular form of Capitalism will consider it morally acceptable to make the poor and sick pay for necessary medication. Conversely, someone who believes in a particular form of Marxism will consider this unacceptable and immoral. Just to clarify these positions are not mutually exclusive to the ideologies I mentioned but rather are just used to illustrate the point.

Regarding ?them being any less?. This again depends on the subject and one?s moral position derived from their ideology. For example, would you consider someone who believes it is morally acceptable to earn money from selling Heroin to the vulnerable as equal to someone who condemns such behavior?

Likewise, would you consider someone who believes in racial superiority and as a consequence considers the slavery of black people to be morally acceptable equal to someone who opposes slavery based on racial superiority.

[JohnL]

What about just Pragmatism - which doesn't necessarily mean a good outcome but at least you can treat each problem on it's merits.