Started by inavalan, August 08, 2022, 04:13:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


"Victims of Groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes"
--- Author Irving Janis, Publisher Houghton Mifflin Company July 1, 1972


Quote from: Victims of Groupthink ..."At first, I was surprised by the extent to which the groups in the fiascoes I have examined adhered to group norms and pressures toward uniformity.  Just as in groups of ordinary citizens, a dominant characteristic appears to be remaining loyal to the group by sticking with the decisions to which the group has committed itself, even when the policy is working badly and has unintended consequences that disturb the conscience of the members. In a sense, members consider loyalty to the group the highest form of morality. That loyalty requires each member to avoid raising controversial issues, questioning weak arguments, or calling a halt to softheaded thinking.

Paradoxically, softheaded groups are likely to be extremely hardhearted toward out-groups and enemies.  In dealing with a rival nation, policymakers comprising an amiable group find it relatively easy to authorize dehumanizing solutions such as large-scale bombings.  An affable group of government officials is unlikely to pursue the difficult and controversial issues that arise when alternatives to a harsh military solution come up for discussion.  Nor are members inclined to raise ethical issues that imply that this "fine group of ours, with its humanitarianism and its high-minded principles, might be capable of adopting a course of action that is inhumane and immoral."

The more amiability and esprit de corps among the members of a policy-making in-group, the greater is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against out groups."


"Groupthink: we are all victims"
--- Author Robert W Malone MD, MS  Aug 6, 2022

This is an illuminating commentary that mentions the above book. It is about trying to identify the root causes that lead to bad policy decisions. The author is obviously highly preoccupied to find an explanation for what we'are witnessing in our society, beyond the obvious incompetence and corruption.

This commentary, and the generous book quotes explain to some degree (to me) my aversion towards the idea of our building reality by a "consensus" at a higher level.

This is in line with some recent quotes I posted, and my rejection of the concept of "oneness" as I've seen pushed by various religions / gurus / dogmas:

Quote from: TES6 #273"All identities are more dependent upon each other, and yet more independent, than you imagine." --- TES6 #273

Although I don't always write it explicitly, it should be inferred that everything I post is "my belief", "my opinion" on that subject, at that moment.