The Plague of Misidentification

Cognitive Dissonance and Its Outcroppings

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is the state of holding within one's cognition a set or series of belief/action divergences such that the person experiences internal dissonance regarding the divergences. In short, the person holds a behavior and a belief that are diametrically opposed to each other. For example, one might think that the killing of animals for the purpose of eating is morally wrong, yet they enjoy eating hamburgers daily. This conflicting set of thoughts and actions leads one to experience cognitive dissonance. 

Origin

The theory of cognitive dissonance was set forward in 1957 by Dr. Leon Festinger, who notably studied with the German-born social psychologist Kurt Lewin. I will be writing about Kurt and his work in upcoming installations of this series. Festinger had the idea for this theory while observing members of a religious cult who had erroneously believed that the end of the world would come by flood on a specific date. When that date came and went, he observed the various members, their levels of dedication, and how each member dealt with the aftermath. Festinger's theory was formed through those observations. 

Key Points

A few key points concerning this theory need to be understood. 

• The model stated simply is as follows: one has a cognition (I don't want to do x), and one has the behavior (I am doing x).

• The desire for inner harmony is a driver for the attempted resolution of the cognitive dissonance one is experiencing. 

• The drive to hold our inner world via our attitudes and behaviors in harmony or peaceful equilibrium is known as the principle of cognitive consistency.

• There are three noted causes of cognitive dissonance: 1. Forced Compliance Behavior, 2. Decision Making, 3. Effort.

The Model, Its Outcroppings & My Intent With the Series

For purposes of this series, I would like for you to note the simplicity of the model. I suggest that cognitive dissonance is ubiquitous within the overwhelming majority of the populace, and within that majority, it is present in almost every area of their lives. As this series unfolds, one of my goals is to reveal just how present it is and how intensely it works as a sub-conscious level driver of human dysfunction, which leads to blindness to the architecture of reality that surrounds us. 

Errant Distillation & Its Generative Option States

It is a fact that we humans constantly try to resolve reality into binary states and then into a single state or unary state. This is not always incorrect as much can be accomplished by properly using a process of retroductive thought as well as other types of logic in this way. However, the mechanism through which we do this can be exclusively incorrect. When confronted with two seemingly contradictory states, we tend to move from the place of emotion and, therefore, try to resolve what a) need not be resolved, b) cannot be resolved, c) should not be resolved, d) can be resolved but cannot be resolved through the means of approach, e) can be resolved and is not functional to resolve due to factors that I will introduce within the writings to come. 

The desire to resolve can come from many places, not limited to but including curiosity, obsession, fear, justice, bravery, and cowardice. These places are meant to be understood as states of thought within the individual or collective, as will be applied later. What matters at this moment is that we awaken to the unique desire possessed by our species to resolve this vast complex of interwoven strands of cause and effect matrices into something that ultimately presents itself as the choice of yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong. 

Do not take this to mean that I am implying these concepts are not valid. To be sure, they are valid, and all have their proper uses. The point is that the desire to bring reality down to our current level rather than to attempt to rise up to its operational level within the architecture of the problem set generates many errors of thought and is itself a grievous error of thought. Next, and also equally as critical, is the attempt to resolve for our own comfort the complexities of our inner emotional states from the place of emotionally needing or desiring to avoid pain. This type of processing does not engender proper understanding and, thereby, does significant damage to the desired outcome of ultimately yielding the correct solutions or resolutions. The tragedy here is that this type of biasing brings about the things it tries so desperately to avoid. This is the substructure that generates the truth behind the statement: what you fear in your life, you will create. This process will be given its proper weight and consideration within a coming essay.

The Why of the Thing Can Obfuscate Its Ruination or Its Glory 

When one tries to resolve in these ways, the place from which they attempt this resolve will influence the rest of the process, even if only by the nature of its existence. The place is a thought space having its own locus, causation, and functionality. It, in short, is philosophical and is therefore behavioral, which means it lives in time and that it undulates enacting its chosen set of actions, whether good, bad, or neutral. Suppose the correction or, at the very least, counterbalance of this errant inception is not initiated. In that case, we will, at best, end with a heuristic (an answer that works but a process that is flawed, i.e., correct answer wrong analysis, formula, or execution) or, at worst, a complete catastrophic failure that will then require the process to be initiated or iterated again in an attempt to then resolve the outcroppings of the first error. As nothing has been changed, the result will be the same even if the surface features appear to yield different or differing outcomes. 

The Problem of Vastness & Approach Vector Issues

The vastness of the problem space (that which is the subject of inquiry, i.e., reality) can make it difficult or impossible to obtain when approached from improper vectors. Vectors that would be entirely proper for an advanced A.I. but for a human would be too heavy in the parallel processing and memory departments, i.e., vectors that would yield the truth but are too complex for our design and thus would bottleneck us into self-created illusory paradoxes. These paradoxes, in my opinion, exist in large numbers, and in part, due to what was mentioned above, though there are many other reasons for their continued existence. I will be addressing paradoxes of this type in more detail later in the series.

Therefore, illusory paradoxes are outlined in contrast with real paradoxes as a point of critical distinction. For now, it is essential to note that illusory paradoxes are created by our thinking errors rather than being existent as a result of an organic outcropping of the physical fundamentals or conceptual thought space fundamentals of the universe. Meaning the way that things are in reality is either non-paradoxical or organically paradoxical. The former will offer us a new way of understanding the data. The latter will offer us a new way of understanding the universe. Those are, of course, their initial offerings only as the complexity of those two option states will ultimately move toward a more integrated Venn diagram crossover of shared space. The critical distinction to remember is that they inevitably gain new territory of influence as they outcrop. The concept of territory of influence will be explained further in the near future. It is also a critical concept in understanding reality. 

Misidentification, Layers & the Real

It is my assertion that the driver for inner harmony, while factual in that there is a drive, is a misidentification in most cases in that it is not true harmony one is seeking. The person in question may experience the feeling of harmony; however, it is not harmony but rather a psychic placeholder that is, in fact, the belief that due to the choices made, they have fortified themselves in such a way as to become unassailable. The primarily temporally obtained unassailability is what is "felt" as harmony. This misidentification is, in part, the reason for the certain eventual continuance of the cognitive dissonance regarding this exact context and problem set. All of this will be laid out in exhaustive detail within this series. 

The Chain of Misidentification

For now, it is imperative that we grasp the fact that when harmony is not harmony but is truthfully inner unassailability, resolution then becomes impossible due to the locus of the false harmony, which is operationally unassailability, also in part. Yes, unassailability is not the bottom of the chain of misidentification. Then why speak of it like this? I do so to reel out the thought sequence and logic line and, importantly, to provide you, the reader, with a sense of discovery and the journey toward that discovery. Reality consists of many layers, which this series is designed to identify and exegete in detail.

Knowing all that we have covered so far, the layer of false harmony masqueraded in place of being unassailable fails to resolve the issues directly because one cannot stop others from attempting to assail their thoughts, beliefs, actions, etc. This particular usage of unassailability makes the other or world, if you like, the unary or unit with the power. That means the power base desired by the individual experiencing the cognitive dissonance is, therefore, provably unobtainable. This person will never have what they desire through this means because to do so, one would have to stop the world from desiring their individual and collective will, which would require each individual to renounce the self without it being forced compliance behavior. Otherwise, we are off down the fractal iteration cycle of cognitive dissonance, which is where we are in the real. Though it would seem that we are there once again, never, and always, in part. The real doesn't change when we do, at least not in the ways commonly thought and not at level two of the real. Contemplate this as it intimates a portion of a proof that I will put forward in detail within later installments.

The Madness of Desiring and Attempting to Gain Unassailability

Further, to stop this would mean to successfully generate an environment where there is no opposition, contrary belief, contrary logic, dissenting opinion, or acceptable proof of the errancy of the power holder's inner narrative. As a direct logical consequence of the dysfunctional (delusional) state of arrival, this attempt to resolve, therefore, misidentifies each component of the reality (event series and context) in favor of a delusional or generated semi-false reality. This causes the observation of the event series to be altered often in unintended ways. The simple becomes complex rapidly once this choice is made. Due to this choice and its having been made prior to x or y event, the cycle of justification and thereby the reframing of reality, which is the altering of reality, is constantly in play. This play is conflict generative, and it plays out from inner conflict to one-on-one conflict to maximal conflicts that involve the entirety of the planet. This concept, when understood, explains an astonishing amount of the conflict experienced by humans.

We will continue. 

B.S.R.

References

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (Invalid Date). cognitive dissonance. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/cognitive-dissonance

Suls, J. (Invalid Date). Leon Festinger. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leon-Festinger

McLeod], [., 2022. [Cognitive Dissonance]. [online] Simplypsychology.org. Available at: <https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html> [Accessed 10 January 2022].

Apa.org. 2022. [online] Available at: <https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/Cognitive-Dissonance-Intro-Sample.pdf> [Accessed 10 January 2022].

Additional Study Resources

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

https://www.scribd.com/book/317245930/When-Prophecy-Fails