Immortality Is Granted To The Individual Through Social

1439 WordsMar 24, 20176 Pages
Immortality is granted to the individual through social identification. Transcendence, through social identification, alleviates thoughts of one’s death and reduces the ambiguity of the world. Moreover, social identification facilitates counterfactual thinking and denial of responsibility. Defense-motivated group members cannot be persuaded with evidence. Fur-thermore, group members forego personal control to the group. Thus, the group protects members from accepting responsibility. Group members often in accord with group behavior even when conscious motivations are absent. It is possible that the tendency to obey is so strong that it operates at an unconscious level. Deindividuation, promoted by the group, can foster dehumanization.…show more content…
Fascism is the epinephrine for the new minority, threatened by their descent. Feeling threatened and eager to reinstate their high group status, the new minority cannot be swayed by even the most persuasive argu-ment. A threat to the group is a threat to the self. These individuals may be so deindividuat-ed that their personal identities will dissolve without a group identity. Furthermore, existen-tial angst may partially explain the use of defense motivations in the processing of infor-mation. As defined by the heuristic-systematic model, people have two primary motivations when it comes to processing information: defense and impression (Chaiken, Giner-Sorolla, & Chen, 1996). Defense motivations allow for selective processing of information, and oppos-ing messages are never received as intended. Contrary to how it sounds, cognitive conserva-tism is not the same as someone identifying as a strong conservative and going on the de-fense. Instead, cognitive conservatives do not utilize much cognitive effort (Chaiken et al., 1996). To put that in perspective, even a liberal can be a cognitive conservative. When de-fense motivations are active, people disparage the validity of arguments contrary to current beliefs. In this sense, the family is a group from whom a child receives their beliefs. To ques-tion one’s own beliefs would be to question that of the family, and in doing so, the group would become weaker with ambiguity afloat. It is not that the
Open Document