#rationalization

[happydazy82]

Coffee Hour

RATIONALIZATION, 02/25/2025

"Every time I close the door on Reality, it comes in through the window." Ashleigh Brilliant

I am an alcoholic. That is a reality against which I had slammed the door for years. She crept in through the window and slapped me upside the head. Facing Reality head-on, I accepted the truth of it and began the long road to recovery. I'm still an alcoholic, but my drink of choice these days is coffee, for the most part. It is still a chemical addiction, but at least I can drive. The only down side is I have to pull over to pee more often, but that's a tale for another day. Really! © keefderpoet, 2025

[serenityquest]

[osarina]

i think people really need to read 1984. like REALLY read it. especially considering the current geopolitical climate

[joisbishmyoga]

I am very sad that Kurama and Hiei are fictional. BUT! The universe is infinite or at least beyond comprehension-ish-ly large and somehow, somewhere, there is an arrangement of atomic particles that exactly matches YYH so *they do exist somewhere* and they are in love but more importantly in trust with each other and that is beautiful.

[gothicseverance]

In Gothic literature, the narrator or protagonist almost always spends some time (…) attempting to rationalize their ghostly encounters.

—Ghosts of the Mind

[unwelcome-ozian]

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

"Theology is the only academic discipline where people get paid not to investigate their beliefs, but to rationalize them." -- Jerry A. Coyne

But also, Grievance Studies domains. Which are sort of godless theology.

[areadersquoteslibrary]

“When you do business with a religious son-of-a-b*tch, GET IT IN WRITING. His word ain't worth a sh*t -- not with the Good Lord telling him how to f*ck you over.”

― William S. Burroughs

[bwhitex]

Democrat Party is The Party of Collective Narcissism

Recent footage from a CNN interview provides a compelling case study for the analysis of collective narcissism within group dynamics or political entities. This clip, serving as visual evidence, encapsulates the quintessential strategies that are indicative of such collective behavior. Specifically, it illustrates tactics such as changing the subject, blame-shifting, projecting, playing the victim, gaslighting, minimization, and rationalization. These strategies are emblematic of a group’s or political body’s tendency to mirror the behavioral patterns commonly associated with individual narcissistic personalities. The application of this framework to the observed interaction within the interview offers a deeper understanding of the underlying psychological mechanisms at play in collective narcissism.

Introduction

Collective narcissism is a psychological phenomenon where a group possesses an inflated self-conception, dependent on external validation and praise. Members of a collective narcissist group often exhibit selective outrage, particularly sensitive to criticism aimed at their own group while readily pointing out faults in others. For example, in the political realm, one might observe a collective narcissist group emphasizing historical racial injustices perpetrated by whites, holding white individuals or groups to rigorous standards of accountability for past and present racism, while simultaneously dismissing or downplaying the group's own racial biases or instances of discrimination. This is and has been manifesting into a one-sided narrative that all societal issues stem from historical white mistakes, often ignoring or minimizing the group's current missteps or potential for prejudices.

Democrats as Collective Narcissists

In-Group favoritism, collective narcissists exhibit extreme partiality towards their own members. It’s called identity politics and if you don’t vote instep or “identify” as such, well you’re going to have at minimum subtle forms of social control applied to you. Out-group erogation, they disparage heterosexual white folks, largely targeting the male population, who challenge their superiority through diving and showing up at their houses with borderline aggressive protests, and some actually call for acts of violence. For example the severed Trump head, by a former famed actress a few years ago.

They act with aggression in response to threatened ego, they react defensively, sometimes aggressively, when their group's prestige is questioned. Then there is this denial of reality and facts, they frequently deny or distort facts that do not align with their self-image. They seek constant admiration and affirmation for their “social justice” activism and beliefs. They crave and actively seek affirmation of their group's perceived grandeur.

Changing The Subject

The first strategy used is changing the subject, it is a common deflection technique to avoid uncomfortable topics. Holder reimagines a scenario in the conversation where the Republican Party acts like the Democratic Party's and instead of Democrats asking AG’s to investigate Trump. In this reimagined of what is really happening to Trump. Democrats are now the victims, these actions serve entirely different, purpose. It distracts the audience from reality of what is actually happening to Trump. Avoids highlighting their policy and related issue with the Trump administration.

Blame Shifting

Holder then blame shifts, after he re-imagines a real life political scenario where Democrats are weaponizing the Justice system and doing everything they imagined in this real life scenario to Trump. Instead Trump is doing it to them. The blame shift is so subtle and clever, but serves his agenda to shift blame away from any personal or Democrat party's past misdeeds, suggesting that it is actually the other party (in this case, President Trump and his administration) that is engaging in corruption. This blame-shifting moves the spotlight from his own actions or those of his political affiliates to the opposing side.

Projection

Holder may then project, accusing the Trump administration of engaging in the very behaviors for which he or his party are being criticized. This projection serves to muddy the waters, casting aspersions on the opposition while deflecting from his or his party's actions. Holder reimagined a scenario where democrats are not only victims, and saviors of Democracy but everything is actually happening to Trump now, is now being reimagined and projected on to the oppositional party as happening to them. This evident when Holder explains the relational scenario where high ranking officials ask a “compliant” AG or DOJ to investigate people they don’t like. This is exactly what happen to Trump.

Playing Victim

Which brings me to the next strategy, playing the victim. The interview on CNN (2023) demonstrates a classic instance of collective narcissism, where the interviewed party employs tactics such as changing the subject, blame-shifting but now plays the role of the victim, reflective of the patterns observed in groups with narcissistic tendencies. To Holder, the Democratic Party is the “real victim” here. This evidenced by Holder imagining the Democratic Party positioning themselves as unfairly targeted by Trump's camp, suggesting that they are the ones suffering under false accusations or partisan attacks. Nothing of real world evidence is being suggested as happening. For example, what is happening to Trump, now, like the law-fare, the lack of evidence to support two Trump impeachments, the Russian collusion of which the FBI agents involved in those investigations were convicted of actual wrongdoing, meaning the agents themselves who were in charge with investigating Trump, were actually the ones colluding with Russian Oligarchs.

Gaslighting

With a subtle display of gaslighting, Holder manipulates viewers by casting doubt on the integrity and intentions of the Trump administration, subtly diverting attention from concrete evidence of their actions towards President Trump. Former Attorney General Eric Holder commented on the issue, "Hunter Biden charges wouldn't have been brought in normal scenario" (CNN, 2023, 00:15). Before the blame shift, projection and playing victim, there was the truth. He’s correct these are not “normal times”, everything happening Trump now, is unprecedented. No one has used law-fare, to prevent an opponent from running for office. Why wouldn’t that rising political opponent not seek accountability? He reframes the discourse, suggesting that such criticisms are nothing more than partisan tactics aimed at discrediting the Democratic Party. This strategic narrative shift paints the Democrats as casualties of an "unjust" electoral process, besieged by authoritarian figures, rather than confronting the reality of the situation. The truth, as Holder veils it, is obscured by a narrative that avoids acknowledging the Trump administration's legitimate efforts to enforce accountability. This includes the invocation of program F and the dismissal of individuals who are excessively aligned with a regime characterized by pronounced collective narcissism. In essence, Holder is redirecting the conversation, insinuating that the push for accountability is an act of political aggression rather than a response to actual mismanagement or malfeasance.

Minimization

Which brings me to my third symptom, minimization. Minimization is evidenced when holder downplays the significance of any wrongdoing that he or his party might be accused of, which leaves the audience to assume that what he and the Democratic Party do are minor issues compared to the alleged corruption, and “authoritarianism”, within the Trump administration. When confronted with the notion of President Trump's reelection and the hypothetical appointment of a corrupt Attorney General, a figure like Eric Holder deflects the criticism by attributing the very issues present in the current administration to the hypothetical future one. This deflection serves as a mirror, reflecting the accusations back onto the accuser, a common tactic seen in political discourse.

Rationalization

Holder might conclude his defense with rationalizations, portraying any controversial actions from his term as unavoidable necessities dictated by the political environment. He asserts that these actions were the lesser evil compared to what he predicts would be the far more detrimental consequences of President Trump's potential appointees. Within this justification narrative, Democrats are depicted as the unwavering defenders of democracy. Conversely, Trump is labeled a racist, an accusation Holder presents as a clear-cut example of collective narcissism, implying that such a flaw could never exist within the Democratic ranks. This is underpinned by a mythology that claims people of color cannot be racist as they lack the systemic power to enforce such racism, a belief that shifts focus from individual prejudice to systemic injustice.

In this context, rationalization takes a more extreme form: the assertion that the Democrats must "save America from its voters." This is done through legal maneuvers and any means deemed necessary, painting the party as protectors in a dire situation. Such narratives echo classic Marxist ideology, which Holder suggests is also evident in the actions of the Chinese Communist Party. Both are seen as authoritarian entities that argue their overreach is in service of protecting the working class, the proletariat, from the resurgence of the bourgeoisie's dominance. In Holder's discourse, the collective narcissism of the Democratic Party is framed not as self-interest, but as a noble struggle to uphold the greater good against prevailing class enemies.

Conclusion

By deploying these tactics, Holder would be engaging in a form of collective narcissism on behalf of his political affiliation, effectively defending the group's image by deflection rather than by direct refutation of the claims presented. In this charged exchange, a CNN posed with a question regarding the impact of President Trump's reelection and his choice of a potentially corrupt Attorney General, someone like Eric Holder, with his contentious history, might instinctively employ collective narcissistic deflection tactics. This form of deflection would involve shifting scrutiny from his own past actions to the hypothetical scenario, thus avoiding direct confrontation with any personal allegations of corruption. By mirroring the current criticism onto the future possibility, Holder could artfully navigate the conversation, effectively accusing the opposing side of the very transgressions being discussed. This method subtly shifts the focus from his own controversies to those of President Trump, implying a "they do it too" narrative.

This maneuver is designed to sidestep direct accountability and instead redirects the conversation toward a critique of Trump's potential decisions, thus maintaining a strategic defensive stance. The suggestion here is that the hypothetical corruption of a future Trump-appointed AG is not only possible but is, in fact, a reflection of the current state of affairs — a tactic that serves to normalize and diminish the gravity of Holder's own past actions by comparison. Holder could respond with a variety of strategies typical of narcissistic deflection but tailored to a collective or political narrative: blame-shifting to other political figures or entities, projecting the administration's faults onto its adversaries, gaslighting the public into questioning the veracity of any criticism aimed at them, and rationalizing any questionable actions as necessary or misinterpreted.

References:

Golec de Zavala, A., Cichocka, A., Eidelson, R., & Jayawickreme, N. (2009). Collective narcissism and its social consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1074-1096. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016904

Golec de Zavala, A., Peker, M., Guerra, R., & Baran, T. (2016). Collective narcissism predicts hypersensitivity to in-group insult and direct and indirect retaliatory intergroup hostility. European Journal of Personality, 30 (6), 532-551. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2067

Marchlewska, M., Cichocka, A., & Kossowska, M. (2018). Addicted to praise: The role of positive feedback in collective narcissism's link with intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(3), 374-393. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000117

CNN. (2023, December 8th). Eric Holder: Hunter Biden charges wouldn't have been brought in normal scenario [Video]. CNN Politics. https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/12/08/hunter-biden-eric-holder-reaction-sot-lcl-vpx.cnn

[beeesworld]

Joel: I said I was sorry about Ron.

Sheila: No. You said, "I'm sorry, but..." That's not an apology, that's a rationalization. Here's a way to remember it. Inside of every "but" is an asshole.

[inbabylontheywept]

so once me and my wife were watching a documentary where a snake ate like a million eggs. that snake just went to fucking town on eggs. and the snake made the eggs look so good that i kept thinking about it, and thinking about it, and thinking about it, and eventually it was 11pm and i ran out of willpower and decided to eat one (1) singular raw egg just to prove to myself that the snake was surely a liar.

the snake was not a liar. texture is like, super important to me and raw eggs are very Texture so i had another one, and then another one, and then another one, and eventually i ran out of eggs.

i had like, fifteen raw eggs.

i didnt really know how to explain this momentary madness to my wife, so my Plan was to put all the eggshells into a grocey bag, and then throw that grocery bag in the dumpster, and if she never noticed that would be Excellent and if she noticed immediately i could lie and say that the eggs went bad.

except i cant lie very good, and of course with murphys law being such, i got salmonella.

so i threw up a lot and my wife asked me what poisoned me so and i tried very hard to dodge the question but i was oozing shame like oil from a room temperature cheese and eventaully i gave in and told her everything and to her enormous credit she was more flabbergasted than actually upset. she did make me promise to not eat any more raw eggs, which i have stuck to, and she gives me weird looks during nature documentaries now as if desire was the only thing keeping me from eating thousands of pounds of krill anyway i made a joke earlier about being able to eat my age in eggs and my sister in law in law made a drawing to comemorate the moment and also because it was my birthday. she's excellent. thank you 10000000% @cintailed. you should all visit her page and admire her work.

[fallacies-examples]

Aight so my friend @the-library-alcove was kind enough to send me some discord screenshots but tumblr absolutely nerfed the quality so I am going to transcibe the conversation for yall before I analyse it. I have done my best to pick colours with the b&w filter on my phone turned on in an attempt to make it as colourblind accessible as tumblr lets me but they don't exactly have high contrast options, my apologies

the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

no that's stupid. Even star trek said that was nonsense

@ green First, kind of a rude response, don't you think? Second I posted that quote because of the similarity in the situations. Spock sacrificed himself to save the crew of the enterprise, and fearless sacrificed himself to save the rest of the nest

I'm over here heating my breakfast with the most dead look in my eyes istg-

Look i just want to nip that in the bud, the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few has been and will always be a stupid philosophy

[reply to im over here...] hugs

@ green Instead of just insulting it, why don't you explain what issues you have with it as a philosophy? Cause I gotta be honest, just throwing around "that's stupid" and "that's nonsense" doesn't do a lot to convince anyone of anything

Okay so the problem is it justifies a utilitarian mindset without acknowledging the long term problems or the value of the individual

finally got round to reading the new chapter 10/10 would recommend

I mean you're not going to find many well thought out philosophers in a single sentence

Like I usually go with the metaphor I saw used in Fake/Zero because it's a perfect criticism of the utilitarian mindset

[reply to finally got round...] that score is way too low

You have 500 people divided between two boats 300 on one 200 on the other both boats are sinking you are the only one who can fix the boats

10/10 these zeroes are actually teardrops

If you choose to fix the boat with 300 people the boat with 200 people will die. Lets say you make that choice. The remaining survivors divide again between two boats 200 on one 100 on the other. The same situation occurs. Because of the utilitarian choice youve killed more people than saved due to not thinking about the future and only going for the immediate quickest solution. the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few is stupid because life isnt like bread or coin it cant be weighed. im sorry if I was rude thats a major trigger for me

There is a bit more but it's not relevant so im keeping the post short (lol sure fallacies-examples this is definitely short). What we have ourselves here is self-contradiction fallacy: Where on earth did the second boat come from?? If you had an extra boat the whole time why would you let the 200 people drown? And if a random boat pops up why would the boat that fit 300 perfectly fine suddenly need to split between people? Even if there was a reason they split if one boat broke could the 100 not just go back on to the boat they left the 200 on?. A self contradiction is basically "mate, you make no sense, and the thing you said already proves that new thing wrong".

However, I do want to bring up another fallacy that green all but admitted to in the end. Rationalization (in the context of fallacies) is when someone offers up fake or illogical excuses for a claim because the real reasoning is embarrassing or unconvincing. Green's reasoning is what we in the logic biz would call "extremely contrived word salad" that doesn't need a discussion of fallacies to be obviously nonsense - But I don't think it's supposed to be logical. This may be too generous of a reading for me to make but I think they know someone who says "needs of the many" a lot and that person wasn't nice to them. Maybe that person even used "needs of the many" to justify doing something immoral to green. It would not surprise me if the real reason green makes this nonsense argument is because they think saying "hey, that specific phrasing strikes a nerve for me for unrelated-to-you-lot reasons, could we talk about utilitarianism as a whole instead?" is an uncomfortable argument to make even though these people seem like friends and it most likely would be better than how this played out.

[alunah-lalunah]

Because you do not have free will, remorse is a compete waste of time.

Free Will as a Useful Fiction .What we commonly call “free will” is:

Post-hoc justification: the brain rationalizes what the body or impulse system has already initiated.

A cultural narrative: promoted by religion, law, and economics to stabilize behavior through responsibility and guilt.

Phenomenologically empty: when examined directly, there is no “chooser” — just an unfolding of impulse, resistance, justification, and feedback.

[theenneamentalist]

Enneagram Type 7 – The Joyful Explorer

Defense Mechanism: Rationalization

Type 7s primarily use Rationalization to maintain a self-image of being interesting, upbeat, and fun-loving. This defense allows them to reframe challenges in a positive light but may lead to avoiding deeper emotions or difficult realities.

📌 Featuring (with credits going to Katherine Fauvre for Tritype®): - Miley Cyrus [sx 738 Sage/Artisan] - Steve Jobs [sp 748 Priest/King] - Andrea Botez [so 738 Artisan/Sage]

📍See more examples of 7s in my Pinterest: https://es.pinterest.com/TheEnneamentalist/type-7-the-joyful-explorer/

✨ Interested in Enneagram services? Visit enneamentalist.tilda.ws for more info.

[techknowledgewithme]

Macrosoft AI Rationalization framework

Macrosoft has developed an AI Rationalization framework that evaluates and optimizes the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies within a business, determining strategic solutions. This framework employs a structured approach to ensure that AI solutions are aligned with business goals, resources, and capabilities, while eliminating inefficiencies. The following is the detailed breakdown of the steps involved in performing AI Rationalization for your business.