↩ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?' What is cognitive dissonance?La dissonance cognitive est l'inconfort mental qui résulte de deux informations contradictoires. Le plus souvent, il s'agit d'un élément factuel qui vient contredire une croyance. La rationalité voudrait que l'on remette en question la croyance, mais Leon Festinger constate que c'est rarement le cas, et classifie dans son livre les différentes stratégies mentales opérées pour lever la contradiction. Motivations linked to cognitive dissonanceRemettre en cause une croyance, cela conduit souvent à se mettre à dos un groupe social. Or nous avons vu dans la page concernant la question 'Quelles sont les conséquences de l'ambition sociale ?' que les alliances sont la préoccupation majeure des humains, bien plus que la rationalité. La dissonance cognitive est dans la pratique résolue généralement de manière à préserver la position sociale et la bonne image de soi, au détriment de la rationalité et des faits. Effects of cognitive dissonanceRepeated over the years, this way of resolving cognitive dissonance gradually leads to lying to oneself, that is to say very concretely harming others, while being even more aware of it. When we add generalized nepotism and cognitive dissonance, we see that the atrocities of the world are not the effects of a few madmen such as Hitler, but rather the effect of the behavior of the majority which favors the game of alliances, and A good conscience can be bought cheaply, via cognitive dissonance. It is a vicious circle: since cognitive dissonance makes it possible to no longer see the consequences, especially since they are indirect, there is no need to fight against it, therefore the horror can continue without limit since the A mass of people who are really responsible place the blame on a few elites or populists whose power in fact only comes from the passivity of these masses. The effect is just as disastrous at the family level: the abuse of some (the aggressor A) is protected by others (the complacent C) to the detriment of the most vulnerable (the victim B). Technically, C wishes to continue allying with A, therefore does not wish to combat his abuses as morality would dictate. To resolve the cognitive dissonance that results from this situation, C puts in place a lying discourse to justify A's attitude, which he tries to impose on B. Victim B ultimately finds himself not only a victim of the behavior of the aggressor A, but in addition the complacent C exert psychological pressure on him to make him deny this reality, thus contributing to making him lose confidence in his own judgment. I define this as infernal triangle of cognitive dissonance. A very common case of this triangle is a mother who otherwise loves her children B, but who, faced with a harmful husband A, will adopt role C making her pathological towards them. Go deeperTo better understand cognitive dissonance, consult the book A theory of cognitive dissonance by Léon Festinger, then refer to chapter 3 'Cognitive dissonance' from the book From capital to reason. The infernal triangle of cognitive dissonance is more widely addressed in the question 'Put an end to the abusive use of psychotropic drugs and psychotherapies'. Concerning the effects of cognitive dissonance, it is also useful to consult the book Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt.
|