Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
the same way we agree to the Dewey Decimal and Library of Congress classification systems. Somebody else does it and businesses that need a classification list subscribe to it.I don't think it's that simple.I thought something similar twenty years ago, and pledged to find the root of the problem and then deliberate a solution.Are we as humans cursed to live with these thoughts and behaviors that clash? Does it bother people as much as it should? Do we just accept that humans are duplicitous?
If we don't want to live a life in contradiction to our beliefs what should we do?
The problem is a lack of a reliable knowledge classification system - a hierarchy listing of all that that is known.
Duplicity is such a part of human behavior that I don't think a new classification system will have much of an effect besides how do you get everyone to agree on the order of that list?
Good luck in my experience people are different than booksthe same way we agree to the Dewey Decimal and Library of Congress classification systems. Somebody else does it and businesses that need a classification list subscribe to it.I don't think it's that simple.I thought something similar twenty years ago, and pledged to find the root of the problem and then deliberate a solution.Are we as humans cursed to live with these thoughts and behaviors that clash? Does it bother people as much as it should? Do we just accept that humans are duplicitous?
If we don't want to live a life in contradiction to our beliefs what should we do?
The problem is a lack of a reliable knowledge classification system - a hierarchy listing of all that that is known.
Duplicity is such a part of human behavior that I don't think a new classification system will have much of an effect besides how do you get everyone to agree on the order of that list?
It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
Class 000 – Computer science, general information Class 100 – Philosophy and psychology Class 200 – Religion Class 300 – Social sciences Class 400 – Language Class 500 – Science Class 600 – Technology Class 700 – Arts and recreation Class 800 – Literature Class 900 – History and geography |
| Class A – General Works Class B – Philosophy. Psychology. Religion Class C – Auxiliary Sciences of History Class D – World History Class E – History of America Class F – Local History of the Americas Class G – Geography, Anthropology, Recreation Class H – Social Sciences Class J – Political Science Class K – Law Class L – Education Class M – Music Class N – Fine Arts Class P – Language and Literature Class Q – Science Class R – Medicine Class S – Agriculture Class T – Technology Class U – Military Science Class V – Naval Science Class Z – Bibliography, Library Science |
I'll play.So, which of these seems easier to remember?
Class 000 – Computer science, general information
Class 100 – Philosophy and psychology
Class 200 – Religion
Class 300 – Social sciences
Class 400 – Language
Class 500 – Science
Class 600 – Technology
Class 700 – Arts and recreation
Class 800 – Literature
Class 900 – History and geography
- Reality
- Nature
- Technology
- Life
- Society
- Culture
- Time
Class A – General Works
Class B – Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
Class C – Auxiliary Sciences of History
Class D – World History
Class E – History of America
Class F – Local History of the Americas
Class G – Geography, Anthropology, Recreation
Class H – Social Sciences
Class J – Political Science
Class K – Law
Class L – Education
Class M – Music
Class N – Fine Arts
Class P – Language and Literature
Class Q – Science
Class R – Medicine
Class S – Agriculture
Class T – Technology
Class U – Military Science
Class V – Naval Science
Class Z – Bibliography, Library Science
So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
you assume that all wives forgive their husbands' transgressions. Infidelity often ends up in divorce.No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Sure. That's a possible consequence to confessing. Of course she might find out any way which in that case confessing would have been a better alternative to her finding out from someone else. So I'm not assuming everything turns out well. I am only telling you that until one speaks out loud their sins those sins will hold power over them. But to the point the human mind cannot live in conflict.you assume that all wives forgive their husbands' transgressions. Infidelity often ends up in divorce.No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Let's use this from the OP
A man is mowing his lawn and purposely runs over a flock of baby ducks and macerates them with the mower blades. A man with his child witness the event and call the cops. The man on the mower gets charged with animal cruelty. The witness then takes his child out to breakfast and orders scrambled eggs for himself and his child. Now the egg industry doesn't want male chicks so right after male chicks are hatched they are fed into a macerating machine where they are ground up alive. But the man calmly eats his eggs without feeling the need to call the police.
People just tend to ignore the fact that the eggs they eat on a daily basis cause more baby birds to be macerated while still alive than the guy running over baby birds with his mower could kill in a lifetime.
That is compartmentalization.
So there were victims.Sure. That's a possible consequence to confessing. Of course she might find out any way which in that case confessing would have been a better alternative to her finding out from someone else. So I'm not assuming everything turns out well. I am only telling you that until one speaks out loud their sins those sins will hold power over them. But to the point the human mind cannot live in conflict.you assume that all wives forgive their husbands' transgressions. Infidelity often ends up in divorce.No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Let's use this from the OP
A man is mowing his lawn and purposely runs over a flock of baby ducks and macerates them with the mower blades. A man with his child witness the event and call the cops. The man on the mower gets charged with animal cruelty. The witness then takes his child out to breakfast and orders scrambled eggs for himself and his child. Now the egg industry doesn't want male chicks so right after male chicks are hatched they are fed into a macerating machine where they are ground up alive. But the man calmly eats his eggs without feeling the need to call the police.
People just tend to ignore the fact that the eggs they eat on a daily basis cause more baby birds to be macerated while still alive than the guy running over baby birds with his mower could kill in a lifetime.
That is compartmentalization.
Your analogy sounds more like a rationalization than a compartmentalization. Compartmentalizations usually occur with victims of serious crimes. There were no victims in your analogy. Other than the baby chicks that is.
Are you arguing the victims (chicks) compartmentalized their getting run over with a lawn mower?So there were victims.Sure. That's a possible consequence to confessing. Of course she might find out any way which in that case confessing would have been a better alternative to her finding out from someone else. So I'm not assuming everything turns out well. I am only telling you that until one speaks out loud their sins those sins will hold power over them. But to the point the human mind cannot live in conflict.you assume that all wives forgive their husbands' transgressions. Infidelity often ends up in divorce.No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Let's use this from the OP
A man is mowing his lawn and purposely runs over a flock of baby ducks and macerates them with the mower blades. A man with his child witness the event and call the cops. The man on the mower gets charged with animal cruelty. The witness then takes his child out to breakfast and orders scrambled eggs for himself and his child. Now the egg industry doesn't want male chicks so right after male chicks are hatched they are fed into a macerating machine where they are ground up alive. But the man calmly eats his eggs without feeling the need to call the police.
People just tend to ignore the fact that the eggs they eat on a daily basis cause more baby birds to be macerated while still alive than the guy running over baby birds with his mower could kill in a lifetime.
That is compartmentalization.
Your analogy sounds more like a rationalization than a compartmentalization. Compartmentalizations usually occur with victims of serious crimes. There were no victims in your analogy. Other than the baby chicks that is.
Refusing to acknowledge the similarity of results of running over chicks with a lawn mower or the maceration of live chicks in the egg industry is not rationalization it is compartmentalization.
That's just silly. Of course eating animals is a rationalization. You keep trying to define the rule (eating animals) by the exception (animals getting killed by lawn mowers). How many animals die from slaughter for food (rule)? How many animals die from getting run over with a lawnmower (exception)?Refusing to acknowledge the similarity of results of running over chicks with a lawn mower or the maceration of live chicks in the egg industry is not rationalization it is compartmentalization.
Are you arguing the victims (chicks) compartmentalized their getting run over with a lawn mower?So there were victims.Sure. That's a possible consequence to confessing. Of course she might find out any way which in that case confessing would have been a better alternative to her finding out from someone else. So I'm not assuming everything turns out well. I am only telling you that until one speaks out loud their sins those sins will hold power over them. But to the point the human mind cannot live in conflict.you assume that all wives forgive their husbands' transgressions. Infidelity often ends up in divorce.No. They don't. Let's take a guy who thinks being faithful to his wife is important. If he cheats on her he will either change his views or he will confess his transgression. But in this case it is highly unlikely that he will maintain his belief that being faithful to his wife is important. More than likely he will rationalize that his life with his wife was made better by his infidelity. That's the norm.Most people simply ignore the conflicts and compartmentalize their beliefs.I think that compartmentalization and rationalization are two different things. Either can be used to prevent the mind from living in conflict but until the mind faces reality whatever conflict there is will hold power over the individual until it is confronted with reality. Most people just change their belief to eliminate the conflict.So are rationalizations which is how most humans resolve their conflict. There's your cognitive dissonance right there.It's psychology 101.That's crap.The human mind cannot live in conflict. Which is why man rationalizes his behaviors.
The human every single day people behave in contradictory ways
Duplicitousness is a universal human trait.
Cognitive dissonance is a fact of the human condition.
It's more like compartmentalization.
Let's use this from the OP
A man is mowing his lawn and purposely runs over a flock of baby ducks and macerates them with the mower blades. A man with his child witness the event and call the cops. The man on the mower gets charged with animal cruelty. The witness then takes his child out to breakfast and orders scrambled eggs for himself and his child. Now the egg industry doesn't want male chicks so right after male chicks are hatched they are fed into a macerating machine where they are ground up alive. But the man calmly eats his eggs without feeling the need to call the police.
People just tend to ignore the fact that the eggs they eat on a daily basis cause more baby birds to be macerated while still alive than the guy running over baby birds with his mower could kill in a lifetime.
That is compartmentalization.
Your analogy sounds more like a rationalization than a compartmentalization. Compartmentalizations usually occur with victims of serious crimes. There were no victims in your analogy. Other than the baby chicks that is.
Refusing to acknowledge the similarity of results of running over chicks with a lawn mower or the maceration of live chicks in the egg industry is not rationalization it is compartmentalization.
Compartmentalizing is a common coping mechanism for trauma victims. The mind separated trauma from my feelings and emotions.
Compartmentalizing & Trauma - His Heart Foundation
Compartmentalizing is a common coping mechanism for trauma victims. The mind separated trauma from my feelings and emotions. They separate like oil and vinegar, until the last straw. As they say in trauma treatment and addiction therapy, “It worked. Until it didn’t.”hisheartfoundation.org