BELONGING TO MANY WORLDS BUT BELONGING TO NONE

AN ONLINE MAGAZINE

| 2007 Archive
| 2006 Archive
| 2005 Archive
| 2004 Archive
| Respond

READER RESPONSE
________
By Amiee Klem
Glendale, California

Patrick,
I just wanted you to know how much I appreciate all your colmuns in the GNP. You have the ability to uncloud many minds and issues by simply speaking truth and reason in ways we can all comprehend.
Keep up the great work and you'll absolutely have my vote (along with many others) when you're ready to tackle a position on the City Council.
________
By Herbert Molano
Glendale, California

Mr. Azadian,
Your contributions to the News Press give us a refreshing point of view. Your essay led me softly and steadily toward your conclusion. I hope that it entices others to think critically about our elected officials, our election process and the quality of Council's decisions.
Here is a quote you may enjoy that I found in one of my favorite places on the web: Transparency International.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently"
–Friedrich Nietzsche

Thank you!
________
By Harry Bedevian

Groupthink was also the cause of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster killing all 7 crew members in '86.

________
By MHR
Burbank, California

Insightful piece on the law of universal imperfection which is another way of saying that you do not accept the possibility of creating utopia on earth. Marx and his followers Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, Ciaocescu, and many others tried, and in the attempt murdered 100 million human beings after discovering that to create the new society they would have to create the New Man. And your group think conjures up the ideas of George Orwell. The difficulty for the individual is discovering whether he himself is "seeing" properly or wheher he has become one of that "herd of independent minds." The need to defend the ego makes this very problematic. It is undoubtedly a fact that most of those who accept group think and who fall into the trap of chasing utopia are well-educated individuals who consider themselves the cream of the intellectual crop. So except for the sciences most PhDs in, let's say, sociology or any of the social sciences, accept more nonsense than the rest of us. Historian Paul Johnson in his book Intellectuals examines the lives and ideas of several intellectuals and how their ideas have poisoned the well. Jack Cashill is another whose books help illuminate this area.

FROM THE MARGINS | BY PATRICK AZADIAN
Los Angeles Times Valley Edition | Glendale News-Press | February 24 2007

Full consensus can be counter-productive

Almost everything I've come across in life with a perfect exterior, the outside has not matched to what's inside. Understandably, theory does not often fit reality like a glove.

Imagine an architectural drawing of a house. It's drawn perfect, but once built, a close examination of the structure will reveal unplanned nooks and crannies. The roof shingles will not be perfectly lined up and the doors won't all be the exact distance from the floor.

Or think of a city plan. The drawings will inevitably be perfect – the street surface will be absolutely flat and the curbs will have flawless curves. The renderings will be idealistic and the pedestrians will be optimally outfitted. We won't see any drawings of the homeless in the corners, the police citing citizens for traffic infractions. There won't be any cigarette butts on the sidewalk.

Once the town is built, however, there'll be unevenness in the curb, cracks in the asphalt and texture in the buildings' façades. Add to that the human factor and you've got yourself a less than a perfect picture. There won't be a perfect match to the theory.

I call this the "law of universal imperfection." My made-up law states that nothing earthly can be perfect. Furthermore, this theory also argues that the more perfect something seems, the more chances are there will be a greater gap between the façade and comprehensive content.

Think of the casinos in Las Vegas. They look perfect from the front, but look from your room and you'll discover all the unpleasant grey tar and the rusty air conditioning units on lower rooftops – far from perfect, perfect from far.

The same concept can be extended to group decision-making. The more perfectly homogenous and consensus-oriented a group is, the more likely it is the group will make bad decisions.

When I was a college student I came across a concept called groupthink. The theory was coined by a social psychologist named Irving Janis.

Although the concept was very enlightening, it initially went against my instincts. It made me think about all the flawed decisions my youthful buddies and I had made during our involvement in volunteer organizations.

According to Janis, groupthink occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgment.

A group is especially vulnerable to groupthink when the group is highly cohesive, its members are similar in background and the group is insulated from outside opinions.

So what are the symptoms of groupthink?

First there is an illusion of invulnerability. This creates optimism that encourages taking extreme risks. Then, there is collective rationalization. Members will discount warnings and make assumptions.

There is also an inherent feeling of morality. Members believe in the righteousness of their cause and ignore the ethical consequences of their decisions. A negative view of "enemy" is also an ingredient in this phenomenon. This makes response to conflict seem unnecessary.

Direct pressure on dissenters halts the expression of arguments against any of the group's views.

Self-censorship is yet another symptom. Members don't express doubts and deviations from the group consensus.

The majority view and judgments are also assumed to be unanimous; this leads to an illusion of unanimity. And finally, self-appointed "mind guards" protect the group from information that is contradictory to the group's cohesiveness.

These group pressures lead to irrational thinking, since groups experiencing groupthink fail to consider all alternatives and seek to maintain unanimity.

Janis attributed some ill-fated incidents in U.S. history such as the failure to anticipate the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Bay of Pigs invasion and the failed hostage rescue in Iran to groupthink.

In the upcoming city elections, residents will have the chance to elect their representatives to office. There is often too much emphasis placed on the good old days, when our city was more homogenous and, therefore, "perfect." We should be wary of nostalgia, and be careful that perfectly cohesive bodies and old-boy clubs don't always produce balanced decisions.

We should also be cautious in equating commonality in racial, ethnic or religious background to similarity in thinking; people with similar names don't always have the same opinion on issues.

Many residents are doing a good job expressing their views in the media and council meetings. We have clear rules of decision making, but putting too much emphasis on electing officials with similar thinking can be counterproductive. Full consensus is not always a good thing.

Copyright 2007 Glendale News Press