#Festinger | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rainyestcloud · 7 months

Text

MAG155: The Cost of Living: Basira Hussian Perspective. Word Count: 1892

This episode was a massive turning point for Basira and I don't think many people are really able to acknowledge this due to the subtlety of it, but just like how Jon finally cracked in 154 with his confrontation with Martin, this is really Basiras cracking point as well. As I've talked about in extremity, and as we all know, Basira is deeply, deeply reliant on Daisy. After all the shit that's gone down in her life Daisy has been the one constant, the one thing that's always there for her to rely on. Not only did they go through extremely traumatizing events together when working as partners in Section 31, but with everything happening in the institute, they're practically bound together. Even the very first interaction we have with Daisy, there's an expression of her concern and care for her

[DAISY - [anxious, drawn] Don’t tell Basira. She doesn’t know about that procedure. I, I’m not sure how much she’d understand, she – she’s not – cut out for that kind of work.].

Time and time again we begin to realize just how deeply bound they are as people. As the series goes on, we see them go from work partners, to trauma-bound, to full on codependent to a point where neither of them see life worth living without the other one in it. To the point where Basira practically sacrificed her life for Daisy, joining the institute and signing the rest of her life away on a contract that would save Daisy's life. They're incredibly bonded, to the point where we really barely see them interact. This is because they're so close that they don't *need* to talk to each other a lot for their bond to hold strong. They're so incredibly close that interaction simply isn't needed, because their care for eachother prevails despite how much they're around each other or not. This expression comes to a climax in mag146 during everyone's intervention with Jon. Basira explodes at Jon, furious with him for hurting innocent people to save his own life. However, when it's brought up that Daisy has murdered people again and again for this same reason, using her status as police to get away with it, Basira ADAMENTLY defends her viciously, insisting that what Daisy did was different, despite it being much, much more severe than what Jon had done. This is because Basira idealizes Daisy more than she likes to admit and for several reasons. Basira is someone who thrives off stability, so with her entire life crumbling around her, Daisy is the stone pillar she can lean on, rely on, count on as someone who's always going to be the good in her life. So when this image of Daisy is threatened, Basira becomes enraged. I've talked about this before but this mentality is illustrated well by Leson Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance. When a person's conviction does not align with physical evidence of reality, and so that person rewrites reality in order for that awkward gap to be closed. Basira needs Daisy to be a good person due to her devotion to Justice, and so even when it's proved to her that what Daisys done is extremely immoral, she makes excuses for her to eradicate the dissonance created between her belief and reality. This is especially because of Basiras massive dedication to justice, and her black and white good and evil way of thinking. And so, the events of 146 go down. (if you want more on this scene [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aWHkkKeG9iDYXaesQ927NAvnHeczZnToT8y_NKBeLSU/edit?usp=sharing])

NOW let's take this in the context of mag155. The previous night after Jon was attacked by Julia and Trevor, he called Daisy for help, and this situation ended up exhausting her. We see just how incredibly weak Daisy has become, as we realize she can hardly take much physical work, is scarily thin, and is exhausted incredibly easily, getting her sick from the temptation of the hunt. This puts her out of commission for a little, and we are really truly hit with the reality of what her resisting the hunt has done to her. Painful, and intense withdrawal with no escape. Then, in 155, when Jon asks Basira about Daisy, we get the following interaction. Let's go through it, starting with the words exchanged.

[BASIRA - I’m trying to convince her to go after them. To, uh… Hunt them. ARCHIVIST - Why? BASIRA - Because I’m not going to lose her. ARCHIVIST - She goes hunting again, you might anyway. BASIRA - And if she doesn’t, she might die. ARCHIVIST - Something you’re fine with in certain other cases, and something she’s made peace with. BASIRA - Because of the guilt she feels over the stuff the Hunt made her do. It’s not her fault.]

Now. my fucking god lets go over this. This is really the scene where everything that happened in 146 and everything that's been happening, Basira really admits to. And what's truly revealed is just how dependent she is on Daisy. Seeing Daisy so weak, Basira is more dreadful than she could ever imagine, because aside from just seeing Daisy as a pillar, she also loves her. She cares about her. Hell she's everything to her even if that fact is extremely repressed. To the point where when she sees Daisy in such a state she is trying to convince her to kill people again. Basira the woman who quit the police force due to the corruption in it, Basira who judges people in black and white based on how just they are, Basira who exploded on Jon when he temporarily hurt four innocent people for his own survival, pleads with Daisy to go back to her own ways. Desperately tries to convince her to give into the hunt just once in order to feel better. Basira cares about Daisy so much that she's willing to set aside every moral she's ever had every thought of justice simply so that she doesn't have to lose Daisy, because she doesn't know what she would ever do without her. [BASIRA - Because I’m not going to lose her. ]

Because she doesn't want to lose her. Because she cant lose her. And so she betrays everything she bases her own self on just to try and protect her, finally admitting how much she relies on her even if it's just through a few vague words. Even after this, when Jon snaps at her for her own hypocrisy, calling Basira out for excusing Daisy but not him for hurting people far less for the same reason.

[ARCHIVIST - Something you’re fine with in certain other cases, and something she’s made peace with.]

Her own hypocrisy staring her right in the face, she still denies, and still does everything in her power to eradicate that dissonance. She makes vague excuses for her, "it's not her fault", "she didn't know what she was doing", "it's different i swear it's different". Then Jon lays down the lines that really just end up cracking her.

[ARCHIVIST - Earlier, when she was still out of it, I… I saw some of the things she was talking about, some of the things she did while she was police. Do you want me to tell you? BASIRA - No. No I don’t. ARCHIVIST - you knew, didn’t you? You knew the sort of things she did, and you let her. BASIRA - No. Not exactly. I thought… It’s not that simple.]

Jon hits her right in the chest with the "I know what she's done. Do you want me to tell you in all the detail I know will crack your vision of her? But that's when we realize. He doesn't need to. It's not that Basira was slightly in the dark about the full extent of what Daisy did and so she filled in the gaps of her knowledge with excuses. It's not as if she only tried to justify what Daisy did due to not having the full picture. Basira knew every fucking thing. Every last detail and yet still excused her actions. She knew every disgusting truth and still clung onto her love for Daisy, and justified it. "Did Festinger ever consider how our justifications are to save not only ourselves, but others too? Did he ever consider how lies and love are intertwined?” Basira isn't just lying for herself, she's lying to protect Daisy. Her lies about reality mix and tangle and knot with her love for Daisy, twisting and warping the two things into one ugly truth mixed with devotion and heartache. Without realizing it, without saying it directly, without even wanting to, Basira reveals everything about her mindset in this scene because it's when she finally becomes desperate. Just like how Jons desperation (rant coming soon :) ) in mag154 is what finally characterized his motives, Basira has been driven to a point of desperation that reveals her motives in full daylight without her even realizing it. Because at the core of it all: is Daisy. The person she truly lives for and the one that she is willing to do whatever it takes to protect because she's dependent on her to a point of no return, a deep, painfully repressed love driving her every action. Even in the last few words exchanged between the two here, we see how Basira bases her every action based off Daisy.

[ ARCHIVIST - Have you thought any more about what I said? BASIRA - Yeah, I don’t think I can. Daisy wouldn’t come if I didn’t, and I’m not leaving her behind. Besides, both of us being blind would be… anyway, being stuck here isn’t exactly her main problem right now. ]

"What i said" was referring to what Jon figured out to be the one way of leaving the institute. (Gouging one's own eyes out). And through hearing that, through Basira realizing the position that's ruined her life, through the job that she was manipulated into joining with Daisy's life on the line, Basira still refuses. Because of Daisy. Her one and only chance of escape is denied because she wants to be able to take care of Daisy. And because she doesn't know if Daisy would follow her. And where Daisy goes, she goes. Which is not going to be a reference to a heartbreaking line later in the series because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon.

because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jon because Daisy and Basira are not parallels to Martin and Jo-

#the magnus archives #jon sims #jonathan sims #magnus archives #magpod #the magnus pod #basira hussain #daisy tonner #martin blackwood #tim stoker #elias bouchard #cognitive dissonance #magnusarchives #tma #tma podcast

32 notes · View notes

boredtechnologist · 3 months

Text

The PC port of "BioShock" takes players deep into the underwater city of Rapture, a dystopian vision built on the ideals of objectivism and unchecked scientific progress. Central to the narrative is the character of Atlas, who is later revealed to be Frank Fontaine. Fontaine’s intricate web of deception is a pivotal element of the game, exploring themes of manipulation, trust, and identity. This psychological analysis delves into the deceptive tactics employed by Fontaine and draws upon the insights of famous psychologists to understand the psychological mechanisms at play.

"BioShock" begins with the protagonist, Jack, crashing into the Atlantic Ocean and finding his way to Rapture. Guided by the seemingly benevolent Atlas, Jack embarks on a journey through the city, following Atlas’s instructions to survive and ostensibly to rescue Atlas's family. This narrative setup establishes a relationship of trust and dependency, which is later shattered when Atlas reveals his true identity as Frank Fontaine, a ruthless manipulator. This betrayal is not only a narrative twist but also a profound psychological shock that prompts an examination of deception and manipulation.

The deception employed by Fontaine can be examined through the lens of cognitive dissonance, a theory developed by Leon Festinger. Cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual experiences discomfort due to holding conflicting beliefs or behaviors. Throughout most of the game, players are led to trust Atlas, forming a bond based on mutual goals and empathy. When the truth about Fontaine's identity is revealed, players experience cognitive dissonance, as the trusted guide turns out to be the antagonist. This dissonance heightens the emotional impact of the deception, making the betrayal feel personal and profound.

Fontaine’s manipulation techniques can also be analyzed using Robert Cialdini’s principles of influence, particularly the principles of authority and reciprocity. Fontaine, as Atlas, presents himself as a figure of authority and a savior, which compels players to follow his guidance. He also employs reciprocity by offering help and protection, creating a sense of indebtedness that motivates players to assist him in return. These psychological principles explain how Fontaine effectively manipulates both Jack and the players, demonstrating the power of perceived authority and reciprocation in shaping behavior.

Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development, particularly the concept of trust versus mistrust, provides further insights into the psychological impact of Fontaine’s deception. The early stages of the game build a foundation of trust between Jack and Atlas, akin to the development of trust in early childhood. When this trust is broken, it leads to a crisis similar to the mistrust experienced by infants who are betrayed by their caregivers. This violation of trust forces players to reassess their understanding of the game’s world and their own judgment, highlighting the fragility of trust in human relationships.

"BioShock" and the character of Frank Fontaine offer a rich exploration of psychological themes related to deception, manipulation, and trust. By examining Fontaine's tactics through the theories of Festinger, Cialdini, and Erikson, we gain a deeper understanding of the psychological mechanisms that make his betrayal so impactful. The game challenges players to confront the discomfort of cognitive dissonance, the power of manipulation, and the vulnerability of trust. This analysis not only enhances our appreciation of "BioShock" as a narrative experience but also underscores the intricate interplay of psychological factors that drive human behavior and relationships. Through its complex portrayal of deception, "BioShock" serves as a compelling study of the dark side of human psychology, leaving a lasting impression on players and scholars alike.

#Bioshock #Atlus #Frank Fontaine #Would You Kindly #Retro #Gaming #Pixel Crisis

7 notes · View notes

spaceintruderdetector · 7 months

Text

When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World is a classic work of social psychology by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schachter published in 1956, which studied a small UFO religion in Chicago called the Seekers that believed in an imminent apocalypse and its coping mechanisms after the event did not occur. Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance can account for the psychological consequences of disconfirmed expectations. One of the first published cases of dissonance was reported in this book.

one of my favorite books.

When Prophecy Fails : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

#cognitive dissonance #ufology #cults #paranoia

7 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 1 year

Note

Feels like the lesson of Birthers was like the lesson of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Democrats think addressing and debunking a political smear is unwarranted since it's so clearly too far-fetched and just plain dumb for Americans to believe let alone take seriously, the answer is usually "Yes, they will."

I don’t think that is the lesson - in both cases, addressing and debunking conspiracy theories didn’t work, because conservatives are primed to distrust and dismiss fact-based counter-arguments (hence why producing Obama’s birth certificate didn’t work) and primed to believe and reinforce conspiracy theories that reinforce their priors.

Here, I would recommend When Prophecy Fails by Festinger and Riechen.

#political ideology #conspiracy theories

20 notes · View notes

hermeticphoenix · 1 year

Text

Ascended Masters

In mid-1950s, the automatic writing practitioner Dorothy Martin, aka Sister Thedra, received a communication from an entity calling itself Sananda – the “galactic name” of Jesus in the Ascended Master Teachings. After conveying spiritual teachings to Martin and her esoteric group, the Seekers, Sananda “revealed” that a global cataclysm would destroy the Earth in 1954. The enlightened Seekers, would, however, be rescued by a flying saucer and taken to Ananda’s planet.

Many Seekers quit their jobs, gave away their possessions, and waited for a flying saucer that never came to rescue them from a cataclysm that never happened.

This true story was described in the pioneering social psychology work When Prophecy Fails, by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schachter, published in 1956. I re-read this book often and take it as a warning. Like Dorothy Martin, we, as practicing magicians, receive signs and communications from beyond the ordinary. One of our challenges is not falling prey to self-deception.

Why are we in danger of self-deception? It’s tempting to interpret any extraordinary experience as evidence of success at magic. Our subconsciousness reflects back what we give it – the principle that Robert Anton Wilson summarised as “what the thinker thinks, the prover proves.” If we read about Egyptian and Indian deities, our subconsciousness will dress our experiences with these symbols.

Add to this that the astral-mental regions are full of elementals and larvae that can pose as helpful guides to feed off our astral matrix. It is conceivable that the entity moving Dorothy Martin’s pen was one such mischievous elemental.

This deceptive allure is sometimes called “glamour.” Certain authors, like theosophist Alice Bailey, pay much attention to keeping safe of glamour in their writings.

One tactic for dealing with glamour is disregarding all unusual phenomena. In certain teaching orders, the prevalent practice is to invalidate any experience a student might have as “illusion,” “Maya,” “distraction” or some such. This is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If we wish to study magic, we must study the effects of magic.

So let’s look at some practical ways in which we can address such phenomena. I would recommend, first of all, detached journaling of such phenomena. Then, their analysis with respect of whether they flatter and whether they impose themselves. The soul mirrors are an invaluable tools for their examination, and a good magic hygiene a way to prevent them.

One of my favourite esoteric authors, Paul Foster Case, wrote that the true Voice will never flatter and never command. I understand flattery to mean anything that arouses self-importance, such as suggesting that a person is exceptionally talented, successful, and chosen for a special mission or favour. Flattery may come in form of a messiah complex: a notion that the individual has been chosen to save others. Or, conversely, it may come as a belief that we will be spared something that “ordinary” people are due.

Let’s go back to the story of Dorothy Martin and see how it compares to these suggestions. First, Martin didn’t practice detached journaling, but took every transmission from “Sananda” at face value. She allowed “Sananda” to flatter her as a chosen “channel” of teachings beyond her level of spiritual maturity, and command her to prepare for the rapture on the threat of cataclysm. The Seekers as a group didn’t take their deteriorating familial, social and professional relationships as a warning that something was amiss. Finally, the group was open to any and all influences to the point of exhaustion, rather than consuming information mindfully and cultivating balance.

Developing resilience to glamour is a prerequisite to a sustainable and productive magic practice, and I hope that these musings will at least serve as a reminder of this, just as When Prophecy Fails serves as a reminder to me when I get a bit carried away.

This article is not written by me. I only shared it. To learn more about this article, you can click this link: https://perseusarcaneacademy.com/post…

#spirituality #occult #magick #spiritual knowledge #spiritualguidance #psychic #ascended master #new age #ancient aliens #alien

7 notes · View notes

kiki-de-la-petite-flaque · 5 months

Text

Singer-songwriter Joan Baez has released over 30 albums in 60 years. Some of her most notable works include songs “Diamonds and Rust” and “Here's to You.”

This portrait was taken by photographer Ivan Massar in 1963.

Joan was the final performer on day one of the Woodstock Festival in 1969. Her set didn’t start until the early hours of Saturday August 16, 1969 at around 1:30 AM.

Joan Baez Band Members:

Joan Baez: vocals, guitar

Richard Festinger: guitar

Jeffrey Shurtleff: vocals, guitar

Joan Baez Woodstock Setlist:

Oh Happy Day

The Last Thing on My Mind

I Shall Be Released

Joe Hill

Sweet Sir Galahad

Hickory Wind

Drug Store Truck Drivin’ Man

I Live One Day at a Time

Take Me Back to the Sweet Sunny South

Warm and Tender Love

Swing Low, Sweet Chariot

We Shall Overcome

#Joan Baez #Ivan Massar

3 notes · View notes

calicojack1718 · 2 years

Text

The Pernicious Role of Cognitive Dissonance in our Social Intercourse

Cognitive dissonance helps survive mental crises but it also helps us maintain erroneous beliefs like racial enmity that then respond to racist dog whistles and cause otherwise "decent" white people to vote Republican.

You’re Endorsing Who? Lately, I’ve been a studying more and more on the role that cognitive dissonance plays in maintaining some of our worst social interactions, namely racism and sexism. The notion that more than half of white America voted for Trump just sticks in my craw. Knowing that just over half of white women voted for Trump just seems un-fucking-believable to me. That he gained voters…

View On WordPress

#Cognitive Dissonance #Endorphins #Leon Festinger #Social Intercourse #White People #White Voters #White Women

0 notes

pigeonflavouredcake · 11 months

Text

Previously in the cult section of my grimoire I referenced Steven Hassan's BITE model. I had no clue until recently that in 2020 he said some nasty shit about us trans babes on Twitter and that made me feel real fukin shitty so I scrambled to change it.

I'm still referencing the BITE model because, I'll admit, it's everywhere. If you research cults everyone you look at is bound to know about it one way or another but before i get into it I threw down the critique on the smarmy boy. That has given me a whole extra page of just criticism and it was worth the pain because i know so much more now.

I'm gonna keep going on the cult page, i'm not done yet. I will be adding some info on Leon Festinger and cognitive dissonance.

#i'm getting INTO IT #grimoire #digital grimoire #grimoire writing #grimoire research #witchblr #witch #witchcraft #pagan #pagan witch #paganism #practitioner #writing #journal #journaling #research

3 notes · View notes

dustedandsocial · 1 year

Text

youtube

Deciphering Social Dissonance: Ideology, Noise, and Subjectivity, Session 1

Session 2 HERE

During this workshop, we will try to decipher social dissonance and why it happens.

For the philosopher and essayist Sylvia Wynter, deciphering is a practice that tries to answer these questions: What does aesthetics do? What is its function in human life? What, specifically, is its function in our present "form of life"? Deciphering It is not a process of demystification, instead, it tries to understand what mystification does, and how it is complicit in reproducing the privileges of certain subjects through a problematic understanding of autonomy.

Deciphering breaks with disciplinary divisions, and it engages with natural sciences as well as discursive production as a way to get the broadest perspective possible in regard to what we mean to be a human.

Social dissonance takes Leon’s Festigner idea of cognitive dissonance as a starting point. Cognitive describes the tension when somebody has two contradictory sets of cognitions, or when your actions don’t match your beliefs. Social dissonance is, then, a structural cognitive dissonance that emerges from the discrepancy between the values that are shared in liberal Western democracies--such as the belief in individual freedom, democracy, equality, and sustainability--and what we really do, which is to reproduce a system based on inequality, exploitation, unfreedom and the destruction of the planet through extraction. Festinger suggests that we constantly try to reduce the dissonant elements by making justifications and excuses.

What can be the justifications for social dissonance? My answer to this is twofold, one structural and one subjective. The first justification has to do with what Mark Fisher called capitalist realism: as there is no alternative to the capitalist mode of production, we cannot think of an alternative to Western democracy and the liberal idea of the individual. Since there does not seem to be a possibility of another form of life outside the capitalist mode of production, we accept the limited freedoms that are offered to us.

The second justification has to do with conflating the ideas of individuality and selfhood with subjectivity. We tend to think that what we understand by individual freedom is already subjective agency.

During this workshop, we will look at current research made in neuroscience such as predictive processing (PP) in relation to discussions around social synthesis, ideology, mental state of noise, and cultural hegemony. By doing this, we will attempt to decipher the function of social dissonance in the current form of life.

About the Author: Mattin is an artist, musician, and theorist working conceptually with noise and improvisation. Through his practice and writing, he explores performative forms of estrangement as a way to deal with structural alienation. Mattin has exhibited and toured worldwide. He has performed in festivals such as Performa (NYC), No Fun (NYC), Club Transmediale (Berlin), Arika (Glasgow) and lectured and taught in institutions such as Dutch Art Institute, Cal Arts, Bard College, Paris VIII, Princeton University and Goldsmiths College. In 2017 he completed a PhD at the University of the Basque Country under the supervision of the philosopher Ray Brassier. Along with Anthony Iles, he edited the book Noise & Capitalism (Kritika/Arteleku 2009). In 2012 CAC Brétigny and Tuamaturgia published Unconsitituted Praxis, a book collecting his writing plus interviews and reviews from performances. Anthony Iles and Mattin are currently in the final stages of editing the volume Abolishing Capitalist Totality: What is To Be Done Under Real Subsumption? (Archive Books). Urbanomic published last year his book Social Dissonance. Mattin is part of the bands Billy Bao and Regler and has over 100 releases on different labels worldwide. He is currently co-hosting with Miguel Prado the podcast Social Discipline. Prado and Mattin are also part of Noise Research Union with Cecile Malaspine, Sonia de Jager, Martina Raponi, and Inigo Wilkins. Mattin took part in 2017 in documenta14 in Athens and Kassel.

------

This lecture covers the same ground as the book he released last year, Social Dissonance. It's like $13 via amazon on paperback and kindle, but also might be available on libgen, who could say.

#Mattin #Noise #Ideology #Lectures #Youtube #Lectures and Video

5 notes · View notes

toqge · 2 years

Text

O TERRORISMO DA SAÚDE MENTAL NA “TERRA PLANA”

por Geórgia Lyma

Psicóloga\Neuropsicóloga\Educadora Física\ Especialista em Educação, Qualidade de Vida e Dança.

Dissonância Cognitiva e a Sociedade Digital: Reflexões sobre Influência, Identidade e Conformidade

Estamos imersos em um mundo globalizado, onde somos constantemente inundados por uma avalanche de informações, que moldam nossa percepção da realidade. No entanto, nosso cérebro possui limitações para processar todas essas informações de forma coerente, o que pode resultar em conflitos cognitivos ao tentar reconciliar crenças e experiências.

A dissonância cognitiva surge quando percebemos uma discrepância entre nossas crenças e nossas ações, gerando um desconforto psicológico que nos leva a justificar ou racionalizar nossas escolhas, mesmo que contradigam o que sabemos ser verdadeiro. Esse fenômeno, identificado por Leon Festinger na década de 1950, demonstra como tendemos a buscar consistência em nossas convicções, mesmo que isso signifique distorcer a realidade.

O lobo frontal do cérebro, responsável pelo pensamento abstrato e planejamento, desempenha um papel crucial na elaboração de nossas decisões e na forma como interpretamos o mundo ao nosso redor. No entanto, quando confrontados com informações conflitantes, tendemos a recorrer a mecanismos de defesa para preservar nossa integridade psicológica.

Um exemplo clássico desse fenômeno ocorreu na década de 1950, quando um grupo liderado por Dorothy Martin acreditava em profecias de desastres iminentes que não se concretizaram. Em vez de confrontar a falha de suas crenças, o grupo reforçou sua fé, reinterpretando os eventos para justificar suas convicções.

Nos tempos modernos, essa dissonância cognitiva é amplificada pela influência das mídias sociais e das narrativas extremistas que permeiam o ambiente político e religioso. O compartilhamento seletivo de informações e a formação de bolhas de filtro reforçam nossas crenças preexistentes, criando uma realidade virtual que pode se distanciar cada vez mais da verdade objetiva.

Essa manipulação da realidade digital tem consequências profundas para nossa saúde mental e para a sociedade como um todo. Ao nos tornarmos cada vez mais dependentes dos algoritmos que moldam nossas percepções, corremos o risco de nos tornarmos seres alienados, incapazes de distinguir entre o que é real e o que é fabricado.

É crucial que reflitamos sobre o impacto das mídias sociais e das narrativas extremistas em nossa vida cotidiana. Devemos questionar as motivações por trás das informações que consumimos e buscar fontes diversas para ampliar nossa compreensão do mundo. Somente assim poderemos evitar cair na armadilha da dissonância cognitiva e preservar nossa capacidade de pensar criticamente e agir de forma autêntica.

A sociedade digital nos apresenta desafios sem precedentes, mas também oportunidades para redefinir nossa relação com a informação e com o mundo ao nosso redor. É hora de assumirmos o controle de nossas mentes e nossas escolhas, antes que seja tarde demais.

#dissonanciacognitiva

#saudemental

#psicologia

#educacao

4 notes · View notes

elcitigre2021 · 2 years

Text

A Dissonância Cognitiva ajuda a explicar por que odiamos ouvir a verdade...

A maioria das pessoas diz "sim" quando perguntadas se querem ouvir a verdade. De fato, 88% dos funcionários dizem que gostariam de ouvir a verdade se seu desempenho no trabalho fosse ruim. E, no entanto, quantas pessoas você conhece que, depois de se escravizar em um grande projeto, ficam gratas quando o chefe diz: "Aquele relatório que você escreveu era ilógico, mal escrito, duas horas atrasado e cheio de erros de digitação"? Eu testemunhei adultos que insistem que podem lidar com a verdade chorar, reclamar e até mesmo socar as paredes ao ouvir a verdade assim.

A verdade soa bem na teoria, especialmente se for a verdade com a qual concordamos ou que nos posiciona sob uma luz favorável. É quando ouvimos uma verdade que não é tão agradável que começamos a resistir.

Recentemente, realizei um estudo com 27.048 executivos, gerentes e funcionários chamado " Os riscos de ignorar o feedback dos funcionários ". Uma das grandes descobertas do estudo é que pouquíssimos líderes incentivam ou estão abertos a ouvir sugestões de melhoria de seus funcionários.

Por exemplo, apenas 24% das pessoas dizem que seu líder "Sempre" incentiva e reconhece sugestões de melhoria, enquanto 16% dizem que seu líder "Nunca" o faz. Esses números se tornam especialmente problemáticos quando você também considera que:

62% dos funcionários que dizem que seu líder sempre incentiva e reconhece sugestões de melhoria recomendarão fortemente sua empresa como uma ótima organização para se trabalhar. Por outro lado, apenas 5% dos funcionários que dizem que seu líder nunca incentiva e reconhece sugestões de melhoria recomendarão fortemente sua empresa como uma ótima organização para se trabalhar. Muitos funcionários têm ótimas ideias, e a correlação entre os líderes que ouvem as sugestões dos funcionários para melhoria e o engajamento dos funcionários é forte. E, no entanto, muito poucos líderes incentivam ou reconhecem as sugestões de melhoria dos funcionários.

Por que detestamos ouvir a verdade, especialmente se envolve ouvir algo que precisamos melhorar? Um conceito chamado dissonância cognitiva nos dá uma resposta. O estado de dissonância cognitiva ocorre quando alguém mantém duas crenças (ou atitudes ou opiniões) psicologicamente inconsistentes que criam uma tensão mental desagradável.

A dissonância cognitiva recebeu reconhecimento científico pela primeira vez em meados da década de 1950, quando o psicólogo social Leon Festinger e dois de seus colegas conseguiram entrar disfarçados em um pequeno culto apocalíptico chamado Seekers. O grupo era liderado por uma dona de casa de Chicago, Dorothy Martin, que afirmava ter a capacidade de canalizar seres superiores do planeta Clarion.

Essa autoridade alienígena supostamente avisou Martin e seus seguidores de um grande dilúvio que destruiria a Terra em 21 de dezembro de 1954. A profecia afirmava que apenas os verdadeiros crentes seriam poupados. Esta foi uma boa notícia para os Seekers que receberam a promessa de transporte seguro para outro planeta. Martin canalizou instruções claras sobre como o grupo deveria se preparar para a coleta via disco voador à meia-noite de 17 de dezembro, e o grupo entrou em ação, desistindo de suas casas, deixando seus empregos, liquidando suas economias e até se divorciando de cônjuges descrentes.

O grupo de pesquisadores de Festinger não acreditava realmente que o mundo acabaria. Eles falsificaram sua crença para que pudessem se juntar ao grupo e observar o impacto da profecia fracassada na fé dos crentes. Quando o mundo não acabasse, os Seekers reduziriam a dissonância cognitiva dizendo: "Opa, que pena, acho que foi muito estúpido da minha parte", ou inventariam algum tipo de racionalização?

Na noite designada de 17 de dezembro, o grupo se reuniu em ansiosa expectativa. Quando um disco voador não apareceu à meia-noite, Festinger observou que os membros do grupo pareciam nervosos. Às 12h10, eles pareciam chocados. Às 2 da manhã, a preocupação e a ansiedade prevaleciam enquanto as pessoas soluçavam e choravam. A dissonância cognitiva pode ser dolorosa.

Muito havia sido sacrificado tanto pessoal quanto profissionalmente, e alguns no grupo começaram a se perguntar abertamente se os Clarions os haviam abandonado. À medida que mais tempo se passava sem um disco à vista, outros no grupo começaram a questionar a validade da profecia. Então, às 4h45, Martin resolveu a dissonância cognitiva do grupo quando ela foi presenteada com outra "profecia". A mensagem dizia que o mundo seria poupado porque os Seekers “tinham espalhado tanta luz que Deus salvou o mundo da destruição”.

Festinger teve sua resposta. A dissonância cognitiva desapareceu quando os Seekers racionalizaram que suas ações não foram em vão e sua profecia não estava errada. O grupo anteriormente tímido com a mídia reduziu ainda mais sua dissonância cognitiva pulando em uma campanha urgente na mídia, alertando a imprensa, distribuindo panfletos e indo às ruas para espalhar a mensagem de que foi apenas por causa dos sacrifícios e da fé de seu pequeno grupo que a Terra ainda existiria na manhã de 21 de dezembro.

Os Seekers podem parecer uma situação extrema, mas a dissonância cognitiva ocorre em todos os tipos de situações como forma de diminuir a tensão psicológica e reduzir a ansiedade quando as pessoas são confrontadas com feedback ou evidências que contradizem uma crença, atitude ou opinião existente. Se você já esteve em uma conversa com alguém que simplesmente não conseguia, ou não queria, ouvir a verdade, não importa de quantas maneiras você tentasse explicá-la, ou que reagiu tão mal à verdade que você se arrependeu de dizer qualquer coisa em tudo, você provavelmente já testemunhou alguém que estava experimentando dissonância cognitiva.

Na conclusão de Walden, Henry David Thoreau resume as importantes lições que aprendeu durante seus dois anos de vida simples. Ele escreve: "Mais do que amor, do que dinheiro, do que fama, dá-me a verdade. Sentei-me a uma mesa onde havia comida rica e vinho em abundância, e atendimento obsequioso, mas a sinceridade e a verdade não eram; conselho inóspito." Eu amo Thoreau, mas tenho que me perguntar se ele está falando sobre o tipo de verdade que parece um soco no estômago quando você as ouve. Porque apesar de a maioria das pessoas dizer que quer ouvir a verdade, eu acho que se tivesse que escolher entre uma dura verdade e amor ou dinheiro e fama, a maioria escolheria o último.

O velho clichê é "a verdade dói" e não "a verdade é como um cobertor felpudo que é bom de aconchegar" por um motivo. O cérebro humano não gosta de receber informações que ameacem nossa auto-estima, destruam nossas crenças preexistentes, tornem nossas vidas diárias mais difíceis ou ameacem nosso status. Admitir que estamos errados sobre algo, ou mesmo parcialmente culpados, não é fácil, mesmo quando é para nosso próprio bem. Quando a verdade dói, queremos nos proteger da dor e, assim, encontramos uma maneira de desligar, parar de ouvir ou resistir. E nem sempre estamos cientes de que isso está acontecendo.

Mark Murphy é o fundador da Leadership IQ e autor de Truth At Work: The Science Of Delivering Tough Messages .

Obs: Na psicologia, a dissonância cognitiva é o estresse ou desconforto mental experimentado por um individuo que mantém duas ou mais crenças, ideias ou valores contraditórios ao mesmo tempo, realiza uma ação que é contraditória a uma ou mais crenças, ideias ou valores, ou é confrontado por novas informações que entram em conflito com crenças, ideias ou valores existentes.

A teoria da dissonancia cognitiva de Leon Festinger se concentra em como os humanos lutam pela consistencia interna. Um individuo que experimenta inconsistencia (dissonância) tende a ficar

psicologicamente desconfortável e é motivado a tentar reduzir essa dissonância - bem como evitar ativamente situações e informações que possam aumentá-la. O Conforto que surge ao acreditar (ou afirmar) que a verdade não existe.

"As coisas raramente são como parecem... Os centros de poder vendem suas verdades e os que as questionam, são conduzidos, à força por métodos como a coação, a estados cognitivos dissonantes. Por exemplo: o catolicismo e o protestantismo "vendeu" a fé do perdão e da irmandade, mas gerou guerras infinitas contra a humanidade. Seus fiéis assassinaram impiedosamente seus inimigos, pois estavam em dissonancia cognitiva. "Eles precisavam estar certos e para tal, matavam". A dissonancia é mais poderosa quando se trata de nossa autoimagem. Sentimentos de tolice, imoralidade e assim por diante

(incluindo projeções internas durante a tomada de decisões) são dissonância em ação. Se uma ação foi concluida e não pode ser desfeita, então a dissonância após o fato, nos obriga a mudar nossas crenças. Se as crenças são movidas, então a dissonância aparece durante a tomada de decisão, forçando-nos a realizar ações que não teriamos feito antes.

#artigo #forbes #conhecimento #discernir #pensamentos #sabedorias #sairdailusão #autoconhecimento #refletir #despertar #consciência #negacionismo

3 notes · View notes