RationalWiki will be going through an upgrade cycle this weekend. This will cause some down time, details are at the tech blog. As a reminder, we try and add information to the tech blog during any outage, you can always refer to it for details or as a form of communication if the site is down.

from Tmtoulouse (Talk), group Site wide (urgent) at 15:23, 18 April 2014

Groupthink

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Into the world of

Sociology

Icon sociology.svg
General concepts
Society & Culture
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it.
—Agent K, Men in Black

Groupthink occurs when a desire for conformity within a group transcends rational thought and issues of right and wrong. When this happens, individuals in a group fail to express their doubts about the group's dynamic, direction or decisions because of a desire to maintain consensus or conformity. Thus the group may be on a headlong rush to error or disaster and no-one speaks up because they don't want to rock the boat.

Contents

[edit] Origin

Affected group members tend to ignore their own doubts "for the good of the group." The group itself may also ignore external suggestions, and can become paranoid when faced with criticism, even when the criticism is helpful or well-meant. Groups are most vulnerable to the results of groupthink when their members are of similar backgrounds, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making.

The term was coined by social psychologist Irving Janis in 1972, although others[1] suggest the term originated with William H. Whyte of Fortune Magazine in 1952. It is related in some ways to the older concept of crowd psychology, although groupthink refers not to the spontaneous actions of crowds but to the activities of groups with a shared interest or objective, including many small groups, and groups of people who may be physically distanced from each other (e.g. people in an Internet community). The similarity of the term to doublethink may suggest that the naming convention was inspired by Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four.

"Groupthink" is why everyone in that online forum/wiki you just joined not only doesn't go for your perspicacious and radical ideas, they actually seem disinterested. Sheeple!

[edit] Role of the iconoclast

For if you kill me you will not easily find another like me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the God; and the state is like a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you.
Socrates

By the nature of human interaction a community's "drift" seems to be automatic. This drift is frequently kept in check by the iconoclast. An iconoclast seeks to redefine that which has come to be defined precisely because of the group's drift. This serves to shock the group out of the automatic "go with the flow" and the more insidious "go along to get along" attitudes which can eventually get in the way of the group's stated goals.

Sometimes iconoclasts, other than actually supporting or protesting something which is wrong and/or incorrect, are just bigoted jerks.[2][3][4][5][6]

A more proper term for someone who challenges ideas for actual philosophical purposes is a "social gadfly" which is how Socrates referred to himself during his trial for "corrupting the youth" and "impiety."[7]

[edit] Groupthink at RationalWiki

All groups suffer the danger of groupthink, as it is an unfortunate side-effect of just being merely human. Consequently, there are a few methods to avoid it. Namely; being open to criticism while remembering that some people really are cranks. Thus, criticism should be addressed thoroughly, rather than be ignored.

Groupthink is different from organised site-wide editing binges, such as the Great War to Remove All Red Links from RatWiki or the Bitch Fight to Remove All Ties to Conservapedia. It is more likely to occur when everyone agrees, gets sloppy with writing arguments or conclusions or generally leaving articles in a state of agreeable rhetoric. Luckily, we have some diversity of background and opinion here, which helps stop us from going off the deep end with, say, a US-centric or dogmatically atheistic perspective - this helps RationalWiki to remember that there just might be fairies at the bottom of the garden.

[edit] Epistemic closure

Julian Sanchez of the Cato Institute adapted the term "epistemic closure," originally an unrelated philosophical term[wp] to describe what he perceived as the behavior of US conservatism:

Reality is defined by a multimedia array of interconnected and cross promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News. Whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from the liberal media, and is therefore ipso facto not to be trusted. (How do you know they’re liberal? Well, they disagree with the conservative media!) This epistemic closure...

His usage is close to "false consensus" or "groupthink." Sanchez's post kicked off the "epistemic closure" debate of 2010, a major Internet event for political wonks. A number of pundits jumped into the fray, including Andrew Sullivan, Jonah Goldberg, David Frum, Ross Douthat, Bruce Bartlett, and Jonathan Chait.

[edit] Other uses

"Groupthink" is definitely the term to apply when you enter a social space and everyone tells you to fuck off.[citation NOT needed]

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

[edit] References

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support