↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
      

What is cognitive dissonance?

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort resulting from holding two contradictory pieces of information. Most often, it involves a factual element that contradicts a belief. Rationality would suggest questioning the belief, but Leon Festinger observes that this is rarely the case, and in his book he classifies the various mental strategies employed to resolve the contradiction.

Motivations related to cognitive dissonance

Questioning a belief often leads to alienation from a social group. As we have seen in the page concerning the question 'What are the consequences of social ambition?', alliances are humanity's major concern, far more than rationality. In practice, cognitive dissonance is generally resolved in a way that preserves one's social standing and self-image, at the expense of rationality and facts.

Effects of cognitive dissonance

Repeated over many years, this way of resolving cognitive dissonance gradually leads to self-deception—that is, concretely harming others, often without even being aware of it.

When generalized nepotism and cognitive dissonance are combined, it becomes clear that the atrocities of the world are not the result of a few crazed individuals like Hitler, but rather the outcome of the majority's behavior, which prioritizes alliance-building and buys a clear conscience cheaply through cognitive dissonance. It is a vicious cycle: since cognitive dissonance allows one to no longer perceive the consequences—especially when they are indirect—there is no motivation to fight against them, so horror can continue without limit. Moreover, the mass of people who are truly responsible shift the blame onto a few elites or populists, whose power in fact rests on the passivity of these masses.

The effect is equally disastrous within families: abuses by one party (the aggressor A) are protected by others (the accomplices C), to the detriment of the most vulnerable (the victim B). Technically, C wishes to continue aligning with A, and therefore does not wish to combat their abuses as morality would demand. To resolve the cognitive dissonance resulting from this situation, C adopts a deceptive discourse to justify A's behavior, which C then attempts to impose on B. The victim B ends up not only victimized by the aggressor A's behavior but also subjected to psychological pressure from the accomplices C, who seek to make B deny this reality, thereby contributing to B's loss of confidence in their own judgment. I define this as the infernal triangle of cognitive dissonance. A very common example of this triangle is a mother who, despite loving her children B, will adopt the role of C when faced with a harmful husband A, thereby becoming pathological in her dealings with them.

Further exploration

To better understand cognitive dissonance, consult the book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger, then refer to Chapter 3 'Cognitive Dissonance' from the book From Capital to Reason.

The infernal triangle of cognitive dissonance is more broadly discussed in the question 'Putting an end to the abusive use of psychotropics and psychotherapies'.

Regarding the effects of cognitive dissonance, one may also usefully consult the book Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt.

Finally, cognitive dissonance, and especially its irrational resolution, corresponds to behavior observed in humans. Its origin is likely rooted in the dual nature of the human mind, where reason coexists with the cognitive-affective system, as outlined in the article Should we listen to our emotions?

↣ Wikipedia article concerning cognitive dissonance

↣ Wikipedia article concerning motivated reasoning