Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort experienced when two contradicting beliefs/ideas are present within the mind at the same time.
It is often experienced by philosophers, psychologists, and those who deeply contemplate about their own thoughts and mental processes.
Carl Jung (in Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious) describes that when an individual ventures into their own unconscious mind, and if they have a well defined knowledge of psychology, they will first encounter a reflection of themselves - this encounter will discourage most from venturing any further, because they become aware of their own inferiorities and short-comings when they gaze upon the shadow. An individual finds that all the negative aspects and characteristics (which he/she had previously perceived in other people) also exist within that individual themselves.
This encounter with the shadow causes cognitive dissonance, as the individual essentially places themselves on trial within their own mind. The individual may ask themselves questions like:
“Do I really have this negative quality? Am I just as bad as those I criticize?”
“Nah, I probably don’t. But wait - am I just lying to myself? That is another negative quality I always found in other people - they always lie to themselves about their true motives and intentions. Am I just as bad as them?”
If an individual eventually becomes capable of venturing past the shadow, they find themselves suspended within the “waters” (as Jung describes it) of the collective unconscious. Jung describes these “waters” as being “completely objective” with “no up and no down, no point of reference”; we are no longer able to efficiently use our subjective perception of ourselves and the world around us.
Once the sensation of cognitive dissonance is well-established within a person’s mind, it can seem almost impossible to rid oneself of it. However, with a little clarity and compensation, the entire neurosis of cognitive dissonance can be resolved rather quickly. Anti-psychotics and benzodiazepines can help if not cure cognitive dissonance within a day or two.
From a neurological standpoint, I believe that cognitive dissonance might be caused by different dopaminergic pathways in the frontal lobe trying to operate out of synchronicity with each other. Without a central point of reference, these neural pathways are not sure what exactly to do with the information they are processing, and the cognition becomes scrambled in a sense, or tangled. As the individual tries to solve the cognitive dissonance, he/she is often times quickly discouraged (due to the uncomfortable sensation accompanying cognitive dissonance) and is unable to finish before quitting. The individual then becomes irritated by the situation, and the neurosis of cognitive dissonance essentially becomes a mental “scab” - if the individual could just stop picking at it, perhaps it could heal.
Sometimes, the uncertainty and confusion of cognitive dissonance can begin to accumulate, as more mental processes become sucked into the wound (it is truly a ‘scab’ in this sense, because just like a scab, it grows larger and occupies more surrounding skin the more it is picked at). This can lead to a full-blown anxiety attack as the individual is unable to determine what is or isn’t real (since the individual can not make a decision about what to use as the basis of a reference point for experience).
“Should I love everyone? Or hate everyone?”
“Should I be motivated? Or apathetic?”
“Should I keep trying? Or give up?”
Since the individual is unable to just “stick with one answer” to use as the basis for a reference point, the individual keeps switching back and forth - the uncertainty with a particular choice soon causes the individual to try the alternative instead; since short term memory is often impaired during periods of cognitive dissonance, the mind is unable to record any relevant data as to which choice is right.
Normally, an individual will try to test their mental hypotheses by observing the world around them to record mental data and come up with a solution for whatever it is they are testing.
Say for example, a person is wondering whether or not he should buy a blue shirt, because he is not certain as to whether other people will like his blue shirt. So, he observes other people wearing blue shirts, and see how other people react to them. If the individual sees a person wearing a blue shirt being treated well by other people, perhaps the individual will conclude that “others like blue shirts and I should buy one”.
For an individual experiencing cognitive dissonance, they will be too deep in contemplation trying to solve a mental dilemma on their own, and they don’t ever get around to observing the world around them to test their mental hypotheses.
Does anyone know the relationship between cognitive dissonance and schizophrenia? I have heard that schizophrenia can originate as cognitive dissonance, or that cognitive dissonance is a sign of the onset of schizophrenia - I don’t know how valid that is.
As for your ending question, I think it is established psychological fact that everyone experiences cognitive dissonance, and on a somewhat regular basis. But perhaps runaway disonnance could lead to further problems, but I have never read about this leading to schizophrenia. As far as I know the causes of schizophrenia are still unknown, although we have some idea of some neurological chemical pathways that play a role in the disfunction.
What have you read about a link between schizophrenia and cognitive dissonance? I am curious to explore this possible connection, if it exists.
Another possibility that occured to me just now is the hypothesis that we are all schizophrenics, we just do not realise it. I read about this recently, that the mind divides itself into many processes and “yous” which each have a different perspective/belief/attitude/desires/etc. In a sense, the unity of mind that we experience is an illusion, because when we switch from one state of mind to another we remain ignorant of the fundamental changes in perspective/belief/attitude/desires/etc - think about it: these things change all the time, and we hold very few consistent directions in these areas. The impermanence of mental states is one argument for this hypothesis; and under this view, the disorder of schizophrenia is not necessarily a disfunction in how the brain works, but is a failure of the mechanism which causes us to remain ignorant of these changes and to THINK that we are still “the same person”. Here it is also important to realise the vast differences between schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder.
Anyways, just a random thought I had. I do not really buy the hypothesis myself, although I do understand that the sense of unity of mind we experience is illusory to a large extent. But then again, as long as we experience such unity it doesnt really matter whether its generated by a true unity or an underlying operation of different functions working together: the experience of unity is unity itself. We think we are one “I”, and so we are, regardless of whether or not this “I” is the result of many different processes. . . as long as the experience exists, then it is real for us, by definition.
I am currently 50-60 sessions into my own analysis, with a Jungian analyst, and have recently begun to experience the cognitive dissonance that Peachy refers to. It is more powerful than any dissonance I have experienced previously. My description to my analyst today, was of two very powerful, paroxical forces surging from my unconscious, over which I have no control. It’s anxiety provoking stuff, but I am managing to maintain a conscious self-cohesian.
My understanding is that the early phases of schizophrenia are associated with worsening cognitive dissonance, as the psychotic symptoms begin to develop. However, psychotic symptoms are perceived as arising externally to the schizophrenic mind. In contrast, the dissonance arising in a non-psychotic person undergoing analysis, is from two internally arising forces. This type of dissonance would not be associated with schizophrenia per se.
Could you expand on this Jungian analysis you are going through, and on the dissonance you experience? What do these sessions consist of, and which beliefs or perceptions of yourself are causing the dissonance?
It’s a traditional analysis. The analyst is of the ‘old school’, I think. Sessions consist of initially saying hello and have no structure or format after that. I just talk, and eventually some sort of theme develops … sometimes. The analyst is, for the most part silent, and almost inert - occasionally, he may offer some sort of reframing, or interpretation.
The unconscious forces are paradoxical formations of myself - some aspects of me that I previously had no awareness of. What I’m realizing, is that those forces can be quite destructive in my day to day life, as the are, for the most part, uncontrollable.
Interesting and challenging stuff for a biologically minded person like me …
I think cognitive dissonance is the reason more intelligent people become depressed as they learn what it means to be themselves usually around puberty and into adulthood. In that sense depression isn’t a bad thing, it’s just a consequence of thinking too deeply about where you fall short. That of course can lead to a more realistic approach to life, but it can also lead at the extreme to suicide if unguided, often people are their own worst enemies. Cognitive therapies can lead to a person ultimately having a more healthy view of what he expects from himself and life. But it’s definitely an art to lead people there, and you can’t be the other person for them no matter how close to their psyche you come.
Good post PN, I am quite uneducated on psychology but that struck a few chords with me. And you have considered this obviously for more than five minutes.
Schizophrenia is partially genetic so you may develop it without any real problems out of the blue or you may develop it after taking drugs, alcohol etc, or you may develop it because of your thought processes. It’s certainly true though that some people appear to have predisposition for becoming schizophrenic, particularly if someone in their family has it or had it and it doesn’t seem purely environmental. Cause or correlation though is the most common question in this sphere I think.
My grandfather has paranoid schizophrenia, so it is in my genes. When I talk to him, you can tell that schizophrenia has completely compromised him as a person. He has no sense of what is/isn’t appropriate in social situations - he might just randomly come out of the blue and say something like “Happy president’s day, did you know that one of our ancestors was a president?” - which of course wasn’t true, but he truly believes things like that … A lot of his delusions are based around him thinking that he is the descendant of some famous/important historical figure.
Over the past year, amphetamine use has put me into extreme states of anxiety and agitation - sometimes I’d say its even crossed the border between “extreme anxiety” and “psychotic delusions”, but I don’t think my own self-evaluation suffices for determining whether or not I had actually become psychotic.
There was one time I had accidentally drank a tea containing “St John’s Wort” while I was also on zoloft and amphetamine - the combination of the three definitely pushed me into a psychosis, and I kept getting delusions such as thinking that my girlfriend was a vampire trying to kill me or that the cell phone companies were trying to control my thoughts with electromagnetic mind control beams…
although even at the time, a sane part of me was telling myself “these are just delusions and they aren’t really happening”, I still couldn’t shake off the fear of the possibility of them actually being real… after one night’s sleep, I had noticeable improvements, and after a week of sobriety, I returned completely to normal…
So I do know that my mind has the possibility of becoming psychotic under certain conditions, and if I think about it too much I can even end up “tearing open” old mental wounds and get mild flashbacks… but usually, when I’m around other people my mind is easily able to re-align itself with reality and things stay normal. However, when I spend too much time in isolation, I’m not quite sure where my mind goes exactly.
In many ways schizophrenia is a disconnection from social reality; the mind steps out of “normal” consensus and accepted belief into its own realms of speculation and paranoia. While this is caused by underlying neurophysiological problems, the resulting symptoms of social disconnect can be brought on by other causes as well other than schizophrenia. Drugs are one example of this, isolation is another; studies have demonstrated that as little as three hours of sensory deprivation and complete isolation can be enough to cause hallucinations and psychotic symptoms to emerge. The point is that just because a person experiences social disconnection or hallucinations/paranoia/psychosis does not mean they are schizophrenic or on their way to developing schizophrenia.
This is also why the symptoms can be mediated and negated by ordinary contact with social reality, thus reorienting the mind back into the social frame. In the case of schizophrenia, however, this does not eliminate the symptoms fully but nonetheless can still help reduce them.
I would also add that as long as you are aware of the abnormality of your thoughts during such psychotic episodes, as well as aware of the possible dangers of schizophrenia, then you are not a schizophrenic.
My family are all insane but functionally so apart from our eldest aunt who is totally out of it but functions on some level most of the time. When she stayed at the house for a while she was hiding food in her room because she thought we were trying to poison her. And when I left the gas on once, she panicked and thought the house was going to blow up and then equated that to another murder attempt, despite us all being in the house as well. Sad stuff, not schizophrenic either just a few too many bats in the belfry.
People with schizophrenia believe the content of their delusions and hallucinations are true. Many other substances, situations etc. may induce psychotic symptoms, but if they resolve when the cause has gone, and if you can appreciate the experience is not the ‘real’ state of affairs, then you’re almost certainly not schizophrenic.
I think it’s part of life/of growing to reconcile the mind into a more cohesive one - perhaps to do so successfully is what separates the successful from the paranoid/schizophrenic, but this is just a thought…
I have battled with myself for mental balance, and I have to say… I enjoyed the journey.
you want to know how you avoid schizophrenia? By letting the zeitgeist mold you and form “you”, just a balloon that is positioned by the wind around it.
Schizophrenics realize the contradiction in how other people perceive them, and they let it all unwind.
Formulating your sense of “self” by yourself isn’t possible - the zeitgeist forms who we “are”. Nearly everything we know about the world, we had to learn from other people. We are just a link in the chain.
Schizophrenic tendencies is the result of intelligence, imagination and forward planning and memory, it is just a disfunctional form of intellectual reason where dopamine production becomes unpredictable and thus neurological problems follow, if it enhances intellect then it would remain unnoticed in the main, or you’d end up With John Nash (A Beautiful Mind), on the other hand if it was non beneficial this would be compensated by those to whom it was, with the nature of human society the genes would be preserved anyway harmful or not in general at least.
That is why schizophrenia is common in both people with high and low IQ but not so common in those of average IQ, there’s obviously a correlation if not an obvious causation. Genetics is like that mindlessly using that which works regardless of the outcome. Intelligence probably grew with standing up right, freeing our hands and leading eventually to tool use in a sort of reciprocal relationship of increasing dexterity to complexity of tools etc, which lead to more complex hunting strategies and better food which in turn probably lead to better brain function as we supplemented our diets with more protein sources, which in turn lead to more social cohesive structures and in turn lead to cognisance of death, fate and self, which lead to mysticism which lead to organised religion and or spirituality which in tun lead to a more complex relationship with both death and self, during this time of increasing exponential intelligence and with the advent at some point along the line of language, it’s likely the genes for Schizophrenia were selected because when they didn’t manifest there was a benefit to the social system and when they did, they made the lunatic high priest or Shaman, hence using hallucinogens to substitute for delusional visions, hence The Revelations of St John The Mad/divine, Jean D’arc, St Thomas and so on and hence fundamentalist nonsense.
Exactly, I agree completely. The schizophrenic mind thinks abstractly to such an extent that it causes his/her cognition and perception to become incoherent.
It is, by its nature, a cognitive disorder.
The schizophrenia portrayed in “A Beautiful Mind” is arguably not a schizophrenia. It is also exceptionally rare that a schizophrenic will have visual hallucinations - but when it does happens, it is usually some sort of malfunction in the visual cortex (an area that is relatively unaffected by schizophrenia). It can be caused by strokes, brain damage, diseases, etc… and was often misdiagnosed as schizophrenia in the past.
Schizophrenia is almost always characterized by a disorganization of thoughts (One example would be to think that certain words are appropriate and coherent when put together in a sentence, when they are actually incomprehensible to anyone else listening… something like “Broken dog ate my flight to Seattle through the piano”).
Aural hallucinations (hearing things) are rare in schizophrenia, and they usually occur only as a result of sleep deprivation (although these hallucinations are exacerbated by the disorganized thoughts, adding to the total confusion and incoherence).
Visual hallucinations are extremely rare in schizophrenia, and as mentioned above, they are often misdiagnosed as a symptom of schizophrenia while they are actually the result of some sort of brain injury. When these visual hallucinations are present, they are often limited to distorted perception, and rarely manifest into perceived entities (and even less likely that these entities are intelligible and capable of communicating with the schizophrenic).
I find your theory -of schizophrenia actually being an advantageous genetic trait- to be fascinating.
I’d like to comment on this. When referring to “IQ” simply in the manner of test results (and not the actual intelligence of the individual, which is wholly unknown without relying on tests that are possibly inaccurate), we must consider that:
A) If in a psychosis, the schizophrenic may end up scoring on an intelligence test as having a low IQ, simply because the psychosis can cause thoughts to be temporarily incomprehensible - hindering an accurate test result.
B) The schizophrenic might over-analyze the rhetoric of the questions, or take them in such an abstract way that an answer can not accurately be determined in the mind of the schizophrenic. If delusional, certain answers may seem to be completely logical and rational to the schizophrenic, whilst being blatantly wrong to the tester.
C) Many of the “schizophrenics” with a low IQ might have been misdiagnosed with schizophrenia, while there was actually some other psychological disability present (retardation, autism, etc).
For severe cases of schizophrenia, finding an accurate IQ might simply be an impossibility. The notion of “intelligence” itself might not even be applicable to a schizophrenic, since a schizophrenic’s state of mind has become so abstract that the very definition of “what intelligence is” breaks down. Is intelligence how many calculations are being made within the mind? How much brain activity there is? How many answers are correct on a test? How well the mind can solve problems?
Depending on what exactly “intelligence” even is, a schizophrenic could be perceived as being an “incredible genius” or “a complete idiot”.
Concerning the origins of religion and cultural metaphysics, I would say that much of it was produced as a result of a leader’s desire to feel recognized and unique. Although, I can not doubt that there must have been a few occasions were schizophrenic delusions were mistaken by an entire population as a religious prophecy/doctrine. However, such occasions are probably not as numerous as the occasions of individuals creating dogma from ego-related processes.
It is important to note that there have been reports of “madness” or “insanity” since the dawn of civilization, and even tens of thousands of years ago, people still recognized is and didn’t mistake their delusions as plausible.
I’d like to illustrate the core characteristics that define schizophrenia. Different observers on the subject of schizophrenia are going to have different definitions of it. However, mine is rather basic - albeit slightly opinionated, it is generally a correction of the inaccurate popular definition of schizophrenia.
Schizophrenia can break down into a few different types, depending on which schizophrenic symptom is the most prominent (sometimes, only a few symptoms are present while others might be completely absent):
I. Paranoid-Delusional Type - Characterized by delusions (although not always paranoid) and paranoia (although not always delusional). The schizophrenic may experience grandeur. It is common for delusions to have something to do with the schizophrenic believing that he/she plays some important role in a significant event (being the heir of a king, being the son of god, being a deity, being the target of a government conspiracy, etc). The schizophrenic may piece together delusional (and generally irrelevant) proof to formulate abstract scenarios that typically in some way imply that the schizophrenic is in danger and that he/she of important significance. The expressions of other people might be interpreted as proof of their participation in a conspiracy to harm the schizophrenic. “Proof” of ideas is reached not through empirical evidence, but instead to match a corresponding “feeling” (such as panic, fear, grandeur, loneliness, etc.) - these “feelings” are, in a sense, the fuel of the paranoid delusions, and often times the paranoid delusions are meant to affirm the existence of the feelings.
II. Disorganized Type - Characterized by incoherent thought patterns, as well as the possible presence of incoherent speech. Thoughts and ideas cease to make logical sense, or their validity becomes questionable. Great amounts of confusion are often experienced. Thinking is typically abstract, and results in a distorted perception. Boundaries between objects might be distorted, and “what separates stuff” becomes an incomprehensible notion; the schizophrenic might feel as if “everything is touching and merged together. There is no way to tell where one things ends and another thing begins.”. Geometry and mathematics may become incomprehensible. Communication with others is likely to be compromised. When the cognitive disorganization reaches a high enough level, the schizophrenic may become completely incapacitated and unable to perform any activities.
III. Catatonic Type - Characterized by the presence of catatonia, in which the schizophrenic holds bizarre postures and remains irresponsive to external stimuli for hours on end. The individual may stare off blankly, or make repetitive movements (rocking back and forth in the fetal position). If muscle rigidity is present, then the episode can actually be physically harmful or even fatal in extreme cases. Muscle collapse and even death can result without medical intervention. The individual usually needs to be dosed with anti-psychotics (dopamine antagonists) or benzodiazepines (GABAnergic agonists like diazepam, alprazolam, lorazepam, clonazepam - often not used because of their addictive potential) in order to end the catatonic episode.
IV. Anti-Social Isolated Type - Although this is typically present in most types of schizophrenia, it can be the most prominent feature and I would consider it a type of schizophrenia in itself. This should not be confused with severe cases of clinical depression or anxiety (which can manifest into psychotic episodes themselves, and mimic schizophrenia). This type of schizophrenia is characterized by affective flattening (lack of emotional expression), social withdrawal, obsessive behaviors (sometimes delusional obsessions with individuals or concepts, such as an obsession with a member of the opposite sex. This is usually not considered schizophrenic without the presence of delusional behavior, such as believing that the obsessed over individual is in danger or in need of help, or that they are of special significance such as a deity or a religious figure), extreme states of negative emotions (anger, depression, sadness, loathing, etc - not to be confused with manic depression). This type of schizophrenia is often misdiagnosed as schizophrenia (happened more often in the past) when it is actually bi-polar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, or just severe clinical depression. If it is truly schizophrenia, disorganized thinking patterns and/or delusional thinking will be present.
The symptoms of schizophrenia can be categorized as either being “negative” or “positive”, depending on whether they are the result of the presence of an abnormal psychological trait (positive), or the absence of a normal psychological trait (negative).
Positive:
Delusions
Paranoia
Incoherent or disorganized speech and communication
Disorganized, “scattered”, or “scrambled” thinking
Grandiosity
Catatonia
Hallucinations (rare)
Distorted Perception (sometimes similar to excessive and abnormal synaesthesia)
Negative:
Social Withdrawal
Affective Flattening
Depression, Lack of Motivation
Dysphoria
Severe memory impairment, especially during periods of psychosis
Usually, presence of positive symptoms is required for diagnosis, as the negative symptoms are too vague and can be confused for other disorders such as clinical depression, anxiety, and bi-polar disorder.
An episode of positive symptoms is called a “psychosis”, and periods of psychosis typically wax and wane, being present or inactive for months at a time. The negative symptoms are usually persistently present.
The popular perception of schizophrenia is incredibly inaccurate. Schizophrenics typically do not hallucinate, see non-existent people, or hear non-existent voices. Schizophrenics do not have “multiple personalities or multiple people existing within one brain”. Delusions are usually surreal, even from the perspective of the schizophrenic themselves, and they may seem to be unrealistic even to the schizophrenic (a lot of confusion and disorganized thinking is thought to result from the schizophrenic being unable to determine whether the delusions are real or a product of imagination).
From a conversation with a guy I used to know in school who has gotten clinically psychotic I learned that there was a moment, which I too had experienced, when all mental reference falls away - of which I read here this has to do with sinking into the collective unconscious - in which there is an opportunity to resist or to go with the flow. He went with the flow, I didn’t - I was scared to death, almost literally, I could have killed myself. Instead of ramming my head against a wall, I luckily was in the presence of a good friend. He started talking to me (about a movie, the Incredible Shrinking Man). I got out of which felt like a loop into oblivion. When I later described this state to my old schoolmate he said I had been strong to resist at that point - he had wanted to explore the feeling. Even if it wasn’t strength but first fear and then luck, I can see how going beyond that border causes the self to permanently split.
Some psychiatrist prescribed me some antipsychotics because cognitive dissonance is still troubling me greatly in daily life. I looked them up on the internet and was appalled by the heaviness of it, though. I prefer to sort it out through mystical practices, which also work with realigning synapses. That is going well actually, it’s taken me long enough to make it work but it is practically functioning in formulating some sort of cohesive ‘will’. Preverbal symbols and hard nervous energy can do a lot to forge harmony out of dissonance.
Synchronicity and cognitive dissonance are the same thing. Observing ‘simultaneous’ events, which are in fact asymptotic, to be meaningful, or somehow related, and justifying ‘conflicting’ ideas, which are by definition discrete, disparate or conflicting, amount to the same process described with different words.
“Just because you’re paranoid
Don’t mean they’re not after you.” (Cobain)
It’s most difficult to say; the ‘what ifs’ could drown a person in confusion - something I’ve been experiencing myself. That’s why I’ve had to put philosophy on the back burner for the past year, but many philosophical paradoxes still plague me every day and they do not go away no matter how long of a break I take from philosophy.
Like that line from that one Eagle’s song, “They say I’m crazy but it takes all my time.”
Interesting thread!
For the most up to date expertise on schizophrenia read E. Fuller Torrey’s “Surviving Schizophrenia”. Also, I would especially recommend Rollo May’s “Love and Will.” May has enough sense to recognize these so-called disfunctions of the mind as something other than a pick and choose between neuroscience and personal identity. We all cope with these mechanisms and consider only the extremes to be detrimental. In other words, the rational/irrational essences at the core of our psyches are not at odds. Where they become conflicts has much to do with social/cultural impositions on personal identity.
I disagree with some chunks of the OP quite fundamentally, but the jist of it is right.
There are two underlying assumptions necessary to understand C.D.: 1). that agents are unalterably driven to see themselves as consistent 2). That behaviour generates beliefs, primarily of the form (in psychologically normal agents) that you believe you did action x, but also (potentially) of the form, you believe you are the kind of person who would do action x.
These are rather broad assumptions and should illustrate the basic element I want to bring to this thread: that cognitive dissonance does not require deep introspection but present in everyone’s lives pretty much constantly, the only requirement being that two conflicting beliefs about the self be brought to the awareness of the agent at the same time, a state that can be, relatively easily, generated by action.
There isn’t an established neurological basis for CD, nor does it seem that such a thing is likely, except in rather broad and useless terms. CD is a psychological phenomena, occurring a different level of functional description, given its rather broad remit, ‘pinning it down’, as it were, seems kinda futile. Neural pathways are never unsure, only the individual is.
Irritation is the hallmark of CD, this is a fundamentally ‘conscious’ phenomena - not in the sense that the subject experiencing CD has total conscious control over all aspects, but in that some directed attention must be paid to it for it to arise at all. However, most of the time it is solved relatively quickly, given its prevalence most agents form a variety of coping mechanisms relatively quickly.
Allow me to illustrate. For CD to arise, there must be inconsistent beliefs about the self present in the mind. By inconsistent, they must be directly contradictory, so:
Agent X walks down the street. He passes a beggar asking for change and ignores him. Agent x generally considers himself to be a charitable sort and so, as a result, experiences CD (action generates belief that contradicts self-relating attitude). Here he has a few options:
1). Distraction. CD requires awareness, can’t experience it if you’re not thinking about it. He pulls out his phone and starts texting a friend.
2). Denial (1). His behaviour doesn’t illustrate a lack of charity in his character, he bought the Big Issue yesterday
3). Denial (2). Giving to a beggar on the street isn’t charity, it maintains the situation of the individual involved, better to give to shelters. The difference between these two is one shores up the belief about the self, the other reduces that counterpoint.
These are all relatively easy. Bare in mind it has nothing to do with what is true, oly what the agent can justify. But they’re all incredibly easy methods out of CD, it doesn’t require deep introspection. Generally CD resolves itself by the path of least resistance, which is why, in our day to day lives, the CD experienced by agents goes away relatively easily.
There are, of course, two other ways out. Turn around and give the beggar money or decide that you’re not actually charitable. These are much harder solutions to reach and generally require more extreme examples to occur in actual behaviour.
The point of this is that CD is generally not scab-like, it comes and goes relatively quickly.
This really isn’t CD as it is currently understood, which is as a mechanism for attitude change. CD and psychosis do not go hand in hand, at least, no more so than any other part of our mental apparatus does with psychosis.
Actually no. Generally, since the agent comes to CD moments as an agent, that is with a sedimented perspective which includes a view on the self as having fixed characteristics, the agent ALWAYS has a point of reference, their idealised conception of the self which they bring to the table when CD arises. For CD to arise at all there must already be a fixed conception of the self, otherwise there could be no contradiction, both sides need to have an investment of force.
You’re already presuming a highly selective, borderline psychotic model of CD, which is not how CD is understood in modern social psychology. It is not a sign of onset, it is a useful functional part of most agent’s mental apparatus. I doubt there are any strong links to schizophrenia, although I don’t know enough about it to be sure. However, given schizophrenia’s own, contested, nature (it is a description of a set of symptoms, not a functional neurological diagnosis) I doubt there are any strong links to any one mechanism.
