Psychological Pornography

No, it isn't the titillating images of the human form that we speak of, but the lazy and highly addictive mode of thinking often called "group think". It's the kind of "cerebral smut" to which we all fall victim to some degree or another in our lives. It is the kind of mental processing where "the thinking has been done for us", where, whether due to mental laziness or emotional comfort, or even of conscious choice, we allow others, usually those in a position of power or authority, to think for us, making the difficult decisions in our lives. It is especially ubiquitous in people who belong to a homogeneous group with similar social backgrounds and ideology. Groups that are isolated from outside sources of information and analysis. Groups that impose a highly "directive" leadership.

A football team is an example. If you tell a team over and over and over again that they are really talented, eventually they will believe it. A unified sense of purpose, and a need to protect one's teammates in stressful situations lends itself to the success of a charismatic leadership. This in and of itself is not necessarily bad or dangerous. But when the message given by the leadership about the team (that they are indeed talented) contradicts the outcome of their games (they lose most of them) and is believed without question, it can have negative consequences. When the coaches consistently lay the blame for their team's losses at the feet of the referees, the weather, or some other tangential cause, and the players hear it enough, the will begin to do the same. They shield out any negative criticism by the media or fans, even though their coach's message is not supported by any on-field evidence. This is dangerous in my opinion.

Another example, provided by my brother-in-law one evening while discussing our reliance on technology, is the "Cult of Apple". My wife's siblings (and parents), as well as their spouses, all have iPhones...except for one brother and his wife. They refuse to buy a cell phone, much less an iPhone. While he likes Apple's products (he uses a MacBook for work), he does not think they represent the technological superiority over PCs that most Apple fans (members of the "Cult of Apple") would like everyone to believe. He made a very provocative observation during our conversation: when people are heavily invested (monetarily or emotionally) in something, they will sometimes suspend all faculties of reason in order to justify that investment, even when it is against their nature to do so. Very profound. And true. Luckily, my wife's father, a trained scientist, taught his children to question everything, a trait which she imparted to me after years of marriage. But not all people are so lucky.

So if a group's leadership can successfully get its members to become financially and/or emotionally invested in the group, and be very "directive" or prescriptive in its leadership methods, i.e. provide all the thinking on hard or important issues, then groupthink is easy to achieve and maintain. When a group, be it a political organization, a club, a group of middle managers, or a sports team, begins to rationalize warnings that challenge the group's assumptions; stereotypes anyone opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, or stupid; self-censors any thoughts that deviate from group consensus; and guards or shields the group from dissenting information, its members may find themselves falling victim to the most addictive form of psychological pornography, and breaking the habit can be harder than most understand.

What are some ways to avoid this? Well, Irving Janis has devised seven ways to prevent groupthink (Victims of Groupthink. Boston. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1972, pages 209-15):

1. Leaders should assign each member of the group the role of "critical evaluator". This allows each member to freely air objections and doubts.

2. Higher-ups should not express an opinion when assigning a task to a group.

3. The organization should set up several independent groups, working on the same problem.

4. All effective alternatives should be examined.

5. Each member should discuss the group's ideas with trusted people outside the group.

6. The group should invite outside experts into meetings. Group members should be allowed to discuss with and question the outside experts.

7. At least one group member should be assigned the role of Devil's advocate. This should be a different person for each meeting, and there should be no punishment for executing the role.

If a group is averse to these preventative techniques, one should immediately ask why. What evidence is there that Mac is better than PC? Why should I sit silently as my boss makes ill-informed decisions that will adversely affect the company? Why is the opinion of those outside the group considered a "threat", and only approved sources allowed to be consulted? If I'm really as talented as coach says, why are we always losing? If we followed the 7 steps above, not only in a group setting, but in our own thought processes (to the extent that it is possible to do so), we might be more able to avoid the allure of indulging in psychological pornography. We would think "outside the box" and realize that no matter what someone in a position of authority and power says, the thinking has NOT been done for us...if we don't' want it to be.

Thanks, Joanna, for teaching me this.