Andrew Hennessey
thanks to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

With the sudden collapse of the caring and sensitive pro-human version of Exopolitics when Dr Salla joined the Boylan and Greer camp that excludes human witnesses of negative human events, branding their trauma and just indignation against perceptibly demonically behaving aliens as hate speech or fear-mongering – there had to have been a shudder of unease amongst many thousands of sensitive and intelligent people.
These would be people who fervently believed in a well-educated, sensible and thorough and methodological approach to the often very irrational alien question and incursion here on Earth.
This in my opinion is a deliberate Tavistock Institute type program of psychological warfare on the sensitive and intelligent people who really should be representing mankind to Non-humans.
In my more recently developed idea though – I don’t personally think that interacting with people from this galaxy is a good idea at all .. as they have been and remain accessories to the facts of the human condition and evil desolate attrition by design here on this world.
Unfortunately, since the beginning of 2009AD pro-human is not a paradigm one would associate with Exo-politics any more, as the cries in the dark of our nations of victims such as Paul Schroeder are spurned.
Instead of a caring pro-human beacon of light, the Exopolitics movement sheds its human looking skin and emerges in collaboration with the agendas of anti-human Corporate interests.
Now the really clever and imaginative and gentle and sensitive types are being driven back.
Cognitive dissonance in Exopolitics is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. e.g. the safe social pro-human caring side of the educated establishment versus the total abandonment of victims of alien grindhouse trauma to the nightmares of soul attacks.
The "ideas" or "cognitions" in question may include attitudes and beliefs, and also the awareness of one's behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.[1] Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
By beating objections to irrational behaviour and grey demons and controlling reptilians down whilst alleging academic honesty and rigour and; trust me I’m a doctor in the great and ancient social tradition of Hippocrates, and then totally debarring the reality of human victims of extra terrestrial trauma – the honest and rational and sensible members of the general public see the uneasy contradiction and totally step away from the playactors of the global cull, who are stalling for time before big earth changes.
After which accountability will not be an issue at least on the infrastructure of Earth.
Dissonance normally occurs when a person perceives a logical inconsistency among his or her cognitions. This happens when one idea implies the opposite of another. For example, a belief in human rights could be interpreted as inconsistent with abandoning humans to alien trauma. Noticing the contradiction would lead to dissonance, which could be experienced as anxiety, guilt, shame, anger, embarrassment, stress, and other negative emotional states. When people's ideas are consistent with each other, they are in a state of harmony, or consonance. If cognitions are unrelated, they are categorized as irrelevant to each other and do not lead to dissonance.
A powerful cause of dissonance is when an idea conflicts with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good Exopolitician" or "I was right to endorse Exopolitics." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad anti-human decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person may have embraced highly educated Exopoliticians thinking this movement is less likely to break down and be untruthful to the public interest than some nerdy net group. This belief may or may not be true, but it would likely reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.
Exopolitical channelling readers tend to experience cognitive dissonance because it is widely accepted that channelling is irrational and rationally unfruitful, yet virtually everyone in Exopolitics wants to feel that they are THE rational choice for Humanity and Disclosure. In terms of the theory, the desire be part of a rational and credible social movement for Disclosure is dissonant with the activity of doing something that will most likely look insane. The tension produced by these contradictory ideas can be reduced by quitting reading channelled materials, denying the evidence of fruitless irrationality, or justifying one's channelling interests.[2] For example, channelers could rationalize their behaviour by concluding that a few channelers are meaningful, that fruitlessness occurs in only disturbed personalities, or that if channelling does not help us, nothing else will.[3]
This case of dissonance could also be interpreted in terms of a threat to the self-concept.[4] The thought, "I am reading irrational rubbish" is dissonant with the self-related belief, "I am a smart, reasonable person who makes good decisions." Because it is often easier to make excuses than it is to change behavior, dissonance theory leads to the conclusion that humans are rationalizing and not always rational beings.
Most of the research on cognitive dissonance takes the form of "induced compliance without sufficient justification." In these studies, participants are asked to write an essay against their beliefs, or to do something unpleasant, without a sufficient justification or incentive. The vast majority of participants comply with these kinds of requests and subsequently experience dissonance. In another procedure, participants are offered a gift and asked to choose between two equally desirable items. Because the attractive characteristics of the rejected item are dissonant with the decision to accept the chosen item, participants tend to experience "postdecision dissonance."
When Prophecy Fails
An early version of cognitive dissonance theory appeared in Leon Festinger's 1956 book, When Prophecy Fails. This book gave an inside account of belief persistence in members of a UFO doomsday cult, and documented the increased proselytization they exhibited after the leader's "end of the world" prophecy failed to come true. The prediction of the earth's destruction, supposedly sent by aliens to the leader of the group, became a disconfirmed expectancy that caused dissonance between the cognitions, "the world is going to end" and "the world did not end." Although some members abandoned the group when the prophecy failed, most of the members lessened their dissonance by accepting a new belief, that the planet was spared because of the faith of the group.[5]
The emerging dissonant dread in Exopolitics; There is going to be Disclosure says my T Shirt – but it really logically and truthfully looks like there isn’t going to be Disclosure because corporate money and Corporate powers and interests talk first and last and the UN Agenda 21 is all about population culls – so they are committed to us not getting away anywhere.
Forbidden [EXO]toy experiment
An experiment by Aronson and Carlsmith examined self-justification in children. In this experiment, children were left in a room with a variety of toys, including a highly desirable [EXOpolicy]toy robot. Upon leaving the room, the experimenter told half the children that there would be a severe punishment if they played with that particular toy[exopolicy] and told the other half that there would be a mild punishment. All of the children in the study refrained from playing with the toy. Later, when the children were told that they could freely play with whatever toy they wanted, the ones in the mild punishment condition were less likely to play with the [exopolicy]toy, even though the threat had been removed.
The more we get trained to keep our hands off the Exo steering wheel and steering committees with a bombardment of cognitive dissonance the easier it is to be controlled later if necessary.
This is another example of insufficient justification. The Exos who were only mildly threatened had to justify to themselves why they did not play with Exopolitics. The degree of punishment by itself was not strong enough, so the children had to convince themselves that being an Exothinker was not worth playing with in order to resolve their dissonance.[7]
Postdecision dissonance
In a different type of experiment conducted by Jack Brehm, 225 female students rated a series of common appliances and were then allowed to choose one of two appliances to take home as a gift. A second round of ratings showed that the participants increased their ratings of the item they chose, and lowered their ratings of the rejected item.[8] This can be explained in terms of cognitive dissonance.
See how the acceptance of the demonic grey can make us uneasy at heart.
When making a difficult decision, there are always aspects of the rejected choice that one finds appealing and these features are dissonant with choosing something else. In other words, the cognition, "I chose X" is dissonant with the cognition, "There are some things I like about Y." More recent research has found similar results in four-year-old children and capuchin monkeys.[9]
Challenges and qualifications
· Buyer's remorse is a form of postdecision dissonance. [I bought Trust me I’m a Doktor]
· Choice-supportive bias is a memory bias that makes past choices seem better than they actually were. [no-one really says there are no Grey Demons right ?]
· Effort justification is the tendency to attribute a greater (than objective) value to an outcome which demands a great effort in order to resolve a dissonance. [There are no earth changes coming and the Greys and Reps just showed up 62 years ago]
· Cultural dissonance is dissonance on a larger scale. [Human history and science is ordered and rational.]
· Does not compute is a common phrase in science fiction to indicate the theme of cognitive dissonance in an artificial intelligence.
· Double bind is a communicative situation where a person receives different or contradictory messages. [Dr Salla said to me that he upheld my ideas on the Grey farming Matrix, but then says that we are demonising the greys]
· Doublethink is the act of holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously and fervently believing both. [reason and unreason .. the illuminati divide and rule.]
1. ^ Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
2. ^ Aronson, E., Akert, R. D., and Wilson, T. D. (2006). Social psychology (6th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
3. ^ Baron, R. A. & Byrne, D. (2004). Social Psychology (10th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
4. ^ Aronson, E. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 4, pp. 1-34. New York: Academic Press.
5. ^ Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S. (1956). When prophecy fails. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
6. ^ Festinger, L. and Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). "Cognitive consequences of forced compliance". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-211. Full text
7. ^ Aronson, E. and Carlsmith, J. M. (1963) Effects of severity of threat in the devaluation of forbidden behavior, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 584-588.
8. ^ Brehm, J. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389.
9. ^ Egan, L. C., Santos, L. R., & Bloom, P. (2007). The origins of cognitive dissonance: Evidence from children and monkeys. Psychological Science, 18, 978-983.
10. ^ Bem, D.J. (1965). An experimental analysis of self-persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 199-218.
11. ^ Bem, D.J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 74, 183-200.
12. ^ Zanna, M. & Cooper, J. (1974). Dissonance and the pill: An attribution approach to studying the arousal properties of dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 703-709.
13. ^ Kiesler, C. A. & Pallak, M. S. (1976). Arousal properties of dissonance reduction. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 1014-1025.
14. ^ Aronson, E. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 4, pp. 1-34. New York: Academic Press.
15. ^ Tedeschi, J.T., Schlenker, B.R. & Bonoma, T.V. (1971). Cognitive dissonance: Private ratiocination or public spectacle? American Psychologist, 26, 685-695.
16. ^ Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229-266). New York: Academic Press.
17. ^ Harmon-Jones, E., Brehm, J. W., Greenberg, J., Simon, L., & Nelson, D. E. (1996). Evidence that the production of aversive consequences is not necessary to create cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 5-16.
Further reading
· Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance: 50 years of a classic theory. London: Sage publications.
· Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (1999). Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a Pivotal Theory in Social Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
· Tavris, C. & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes were made (but not by me): Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts. Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Inc. (ISBN 978-0-15-101098-1)


Popular Posts