“Illusions of Invulnerability” describes the potential for a group to become overconfident in their ability to make decisions leading to reckless choices, which have not been thought throughーbelieving that no matter what happens their decision will work out (Lunenburg). “Collective Rationalization” is another one of the traits Janis explained as an indication of groupthink, which occurs when, “group members collectively rationalize in order to discount warnings that might lead them to reconcile their assumptions before they commit themselves to their past policy decisions” (Lunenburg). The next symptom of groupthink nicknamed, “Belief in Inherent Morality of the Group”, explains collectives believe all members uphold similar morals/ rightness in decision-making, leaving decisions unchecked, as they are assumed to always be correct. This is similar to the Illusions of Invulnerability phenomenon due to the high level of trust in the groups ability to decide, and like in Collective Rationalization, allows the group to brush off the possibility of being wrong (Communication
A fair argument to lay out is- how do we know that our own judgement is better than our supposed superiors? A main source of tension for participants within the Milgram experiment is that they were anxious at the absence of knowledge that they believed they held. It seems that the
Although one comportment or disorder might be regarded as norm in one culture, it could be regarded as abnormal in another culture, and thus making therapy less equal in altered populations. Counselors must take into justification every culture, otherwise they are unwitting and are under culture coercion. Unfortunately, individuals come with bias and pre-conceived concepts. These biases and pre-conceived concepts generally impinge on treatment and therapy, because when working with culturally diverse populaces heedless of their beliefs and values, the outcomes of therapy are ineffective. Those who are attentive in the study of multiculturalism have even defined counselors negatively in the sense of treatment by calling them impervious to the beliefs and values of their culturally distinctive clients.
Therefore, this is the direct result of the negative mentality and the unwillingness to acknowledge that he was not liable guilty, the corrupt justice system would not be resolved. It is apparent that although the reader may think that the human nature would want righteousness or and kindness, it goes to show how people allow themselves to be manipulated and lose their self control so
They instead simply believe that they have been lied to and want to make everyone believe that the world is flat. Their evidence is not scientifically sound, yet they believe it and will not sway from the view that the earth is flat. This confidence and feeling of a group belonging attracts others who want to feel as if they are a part of a group minority that is correct, not the group majority that is
Thus, since it is impractical to use a rigid moral system, both Weber and Sophocles discuss the importance of responsibility and consequences in decision making. This conception of responsibility and consequences is significant because it differs from a utilitarian quest for “the greater good”. When considering one’s responsibilities, it is inadvisable to cause pain to the individuals that a political leader is responsible for, regardless of the total pleasure it may lead to. In the case of Antigone, Creon’s decision leads to a tragic outcome because he does not take into account the consequences of his actions. His resolve to obstinately stick to his decision is his ultimate downfall.
Too much self-confidence in a person has the ability to block them from thinking rationally. Being prideful, unimaginative, and close minded can eventually lead to one’s downfall. Too much self-assurance generally does not lead to admirable or advantageous decisions. It prompts that specific person to make irrational choices. The man’s unimaginative personality masks him from understanding the significances his actions carry.
This ensures that the ruler will be honest and in the best interest of the group as a whole. Additionally, Castiglione believed virtue was related to prudence in the way that a person can decipher right from wrong. He also believed that when men engage in imprudence, it puts them at risk for making false judgement (292). He wanted to indicate that when a person disregards morals, they invite the possibility of inconsistency within their moral judgement. This could possibly cloud their judgement in the future in regards to morals.
According to Merriam Webster, a stereotype is “... a standardized mental picture that is held in common by members of a group and that represents an oversimplified opinion, prejudiced attitude, or uncritical judgement”. Stereotypes could be based on truths but in most cases, they are overly exaggerated. According to the article “Stereotypes” by Saul McLeoud, stereotyping is “...a major way in which we simplify our social world; since they reduce the amount of processing (i.e. thinking) we have to do when we meet a new person” (7). In order to reduce thinking so much it is common for people to place someone in a group and assume that they have all of the common characteristics of members of that group.
Under the moral theory of act utilitarianism, I will argue that the elements that define it as a moral theory, do not always hold up as a strong theory in its totality when we critically analyse it. I will also point out a few hypothetical situations and possible consequences when implementation of act utilitarianism is followed through. The consequences will be proven to have the potential to undo the utility of happiness for our loved family members, in order to care for strangers we do not have a connection with, which in my opinion is highly immoral. According to lecture notes ( Weijers & Munn 2016) there are two main forms of utilitarianism, namely act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Rule utilitarians follow the belief that