TheManInTheShack t1_j8g7yno wrote
> Aside from claiming that the information is not relevant, most people stated that they wanted to avoid finding out that one of their colleagues or family members was a Stasi informant and that viewing those files would impact their ability to trust others.
Hey look! Cognitive Dissonance!
Foxs-In-A-Trenchcoat t1_j8gc2w3 wrote
That's not what cognitive dissonance is.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8gcc8u wrote
Sure it is. They care about truth but also don’t want to know it.
From Wikipedia: In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the perception of contradictory information, and the mental toll of it.
Foxs-In-A-Trenchcoat t1_j8gclmw wrote
CD is clinging to an untrue belief in the face of solid evidence that they're wrong. It's not choosing to not know something.
Gen_Ripper t1_j8gxbmx wrote
I thought the dissonance was how it makes you feel, aka the feeling of unease at realizing information you believe is contradictory
TheManInTheShack t1_j8h3gkc wrote
It’s that too.
-JPMorgan t1_j8gj445 wrote
They cling to the untrue belief that they care about truth although the evidence - the fact they'd rather avoid finding out about the past of their colleagues - contradicts it.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8h3fx8 wrote
Cognitive Dissonance is the belief in contradictory information which is exactly the issue here.
TheTesterDude t1_j8ia842 wrote
What contradictory information?
TheManInTheShack t1_j8ibezv wrote
They want to believe that people around them are honest and trustworthy so they are choosing to ignore what they know will contradict that. Thus they know the information is contradictory. They are simply not looking to avoid the specifics.
FwibbFwibb t1_j8itun7 wrote
> so they are choosing to ignore what they know will contradict that.
No, if you had actually read what this is about, you would know that they don't want to find out who it was. They don't already know and have no way of knowing.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8jo6ri wrote
I did read it. They know that it’s likely some people they currently trust would no longer be trustable if they looked into it. So they choose not to do so. That’s the entire point of the article.
TheTesterDude t1_j8jlsra wrote
There is no contradiction, not everyone was part of Gestapo etc.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8joaoq wrote
Right but they know if they look, there’s some chance that someone they currently trust would no longer be trustable so they choose to not look.
TheTesterDude t1_j8jp8u9 wrote
You don't have to think your dad are trust worthy to not want to know if he was a part of Gestapo.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8k2pcp wrote
The point was they knowingly chose not to find out if someone they knew was not trustworthy to avoid being unable to trust them.
The conflict is between believing they are trustworthy and knowing they may not be.
TheTesterDude t1_j8llbxq wrote
But why the assumption they believing them to be trustworthy?
TheManInTheShack t1_j8llkk9 wrote
Because the article says they are deliberately choosing ignorance. The only way that makes sense is if they already trust them. If they didn’t trust them, they’d be more likely to want to confirm their distrust by getting more evidence that supports it.
TheTesterDude t1_j8lmgis wrote
You sit around making assumptions from your point of view as if you matter regarding why these people chose to do something.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8lmk8z wrote
I’m not making any assumptions. The article makes this abundantly clear.
TheTesterDude t1_j8lmm6m wrote
No, it does not.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8lmr8g wrote
From the article:
“…most people stated that they wanted to avoid finding out that one of their colleagues or family members was a Stasi informant and that viewing those files would impact their ability to trust others.”
TheTesterDude t1_j8lnc3i wrote
And? That doesn't mean they find people trustworthy to begin with.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8lno3f wrote
Deductive reasoning. These are people close to them (friends and colleagues). The only reason to avoid learning the truth about them is that they already trust them. If they don’t trust them, then finding out the truth would only further confirm that they are right not to do so. This is basic human psychology.
TheTesterDude t1_j8lnud0 wrote
>The only reason to avoid learning the truth about them is that they already trust them
You keep writing this, but that is not a logical conclusion.
TheManInTheShack t1_j8lnywe wrote
Yes, it is. In fact, it’s the only logical conclusion and is the entire point of the article. This is getting tiresome.
TheTesterDude t1_j8lo40v wrote
No it isn't.
vibrance9460 t1_j8gaqfw wrote
No! I won’t look!
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments