Obscene words I, probably like most of my peers, I learned at summer camp. Nouns were marked some Tanka, verbal derivatives - all of its actions, since no one was a friend. No one, of course, from "normal people", the rest of it is very even been friends. But in fact "fools", so they had no idea: timid skinny being smeared with green paint knees and terrifyingly short bangs dishonors proud pride 11-year-old girls, and then immediately banished away.
Why such a dramatic example? Labels, or, to put it scientifically, value judgment, is the thing actually rather offensive. On the one hand, they are necessary because they save our cognitive efforts, allowing to draw conclusions about people and events on well-each time not to reinvent the wheel. On the other hasty verdict has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence. In the pledge of children against this particularly clearly: "sissy", "ugly", "slob", "sneak", as well as all other unpopular for community role.
But what happens in adults? Everything is the same. No matter what the label, snobbish-arrogant about "a man not of our circle" dependent-enterprise about the "inability to communicate" or a simple, common about the donkey, the essence is the same: to drive his or her unclean broom and up to the canadian border.
Two again!
Most experts attribute the habit of giving out the analysis of the near and far with protective mechanisms of the psyche, namely projections, when their own negative experiences are attributed to others on the principle of "shifting the blame". So, people who pathologically "lucky" inadequate chiefs, envious colleagues and insincere friends, displaces its own gloomy perception of the world, because to admit that you are embittered by the whole world, very, very difficult. Or, for example, mother-in-law, with rapture, complaining wife. It is obvious that we are talking about jealousy, except for the ladies: she is convinced that, whether on the spot "this monkey decent woman", everything would be different. "Convenient shortcuts and those that help to absolve themselves of responsibility for the relationship. In this sense, a very typical family myth about Apple and the Apple tree.
"When we have the explanation of the fact that our loved ones have fatal flaws ("it's all in dad! " or "she is the spitting image of her mother"), we removed all responsibility for what happens, " explains psychologist, researcher at the faculty of psychology of Moscow state University Natalia Evsikova. Because if everything is predetermined, it is pointless to try to change something". Actually the problem is not in the similarity and likeness, and that we ourselves create the situation so that the person behaved in a similar way. Similar to this is the mapping of character with the sign of the zodiac. This is even more blatant way, not figuring out the causes and essence of the phenomenon, to say: "What can we do? He is a lion, so aggressive! "
By the way, for children such statements are particularly dangerous because they leave practically no chance to change: what can we talk when you know that lions hostile, virgin nedoverchiv and Taurus stubborn? There'll be people to live with his suspicion, suspiciousness or obstinacy, not thinking that everything could be different.
I'll straighten
Of course, to become the object of someone's reckless judgments nobody wants. As a result, we demonstrated ingenuity, versatility, adequacy, sense of humor and many other good qualities, inevitably find themselves in the power of another stereotype is estimated based. Conceptual formulated and open psychologist Vladimir Levi, this habit is formed in early childhood as one of the main instruments of socialization. To some extent it is useful, because it provides the ability to adapt to the environment, its norms, mentality and values. To complete the estimated degrees of addiction becomes the source of numerous neuroses, fears, and especially sociophobia. One of the most characteristic examples of shyness. It would seem, passivity, compromising position, the reluctance to "come out" should show the person from the zone of interest evil languages. In practice, however, things. According to Stanford Professor Philip Zimbardo, shy people are often exposed to negative evaluations and even persecution if only because of the existence of the above-mentioned mechanism projections. "Clean sheet" - this is a great screen for those who are accustomed to see in another's eye straws. The other pole of the evaluation will be based fear of neglect and, accordingly, the search of attention at any cost, when it is not important, good or bad, the main thing to be remembered and talked.
See through!
Of course, our criticism is not always unfair and wrong. In the end, if someone barks, runs like a dog, is a dog. In principle, this can be argued, however, those committed to non-judgment thinking as such, inevitable descent into relativism - the transition from knowledge absolute to relative, from ready-made answers to endless questions.
"If you need to buy disposable lighter, you will not spend long hours learning the technical characteristics of this device, the survey experienced users and structured interviews with vendors, " notes the doctor of psychological Sciences, Professor Elena Sergienko. You just considers one of the most reliable lighters and easy to use and will get it. This is the meaning of evaluative behavior: it may be incorrect in the strict sense of the word, but most often it will be optimal from the point of view of economy and to minimize the effort".
To eradicate the habit of evaluative thinking is pointless, it is useful and even necessary - provided that we are not going to put up shortcuts and lay some "error". According to a study by the Institute of psychology RAS, the rationality of our findings is inevitably disturbed by the whole group of factors: the specificity of the problem, context, cultural stereotypes, as well as our attitude and emotional state. To take even such a thing as self-esteem. Previously it was believed that "normal" mentally healthy people evaluate themselves objectively, that is not understate or overstate their advantages in comparison with others, but more recent experiments, scientists have proven that this is not quite true. American psychologists asked volunteers to rate their mental abilities by selecting the three answer choices most suitable: "I'm much smarter than most people my age, I am somewhat stupider than most" and "I the same as all". In the end, the vast majority chose the option "smarter"... Another factor impeding the accuracy of our conclusions is the so - called halo effect, when certain quality attributed to a person depending on our relationship to it. For example, we believe that Ivanov is an intelligent man. We begin to ascribe to him the thoughts, actions, and characteristics that, in our opinion, the inherent intelligent man. In the end, if he does not, as we expected (he goes and complains to us authorities), we take it almost as a betrayal and then generate the next output pattern: still waters run deep!
Trust yourself!
A value judgment may be wrong, but optimal, since the accuracy in the mapping of reality is not the only criterion of optimality of the estimates. There are savings of cognitive effort, improving the efficiency of subsequent steps (when we think we are doing the right thing, we are more confident, improve emotional state ("well, because we are right! ").
If you strongly to anyone offended, believe that the other is guided by the most vile selfish reasons, you know, you paste the shortcut. Look no malice in others ' actions, look for the logic. Usually it's there.
"Everyone has their own feelings, so know the inner world of each other is impossible," says clinical and medical psychologist, Professor of the Institute of practical psychology and psychoanalysis Natalia manukhina.
Divide near and far on the rams, lions, monkeys, dragons and mice are comfortable, and some common idea in these polished for centuries "bestiaries" certainly, there. Only science has gone further. Means for determining psycho-many: you can "share" on the Myers-Briggs, Jung or Gannushkina, it is not too difficult. If you know all this, fine. Please note the mental characteristics of the other person and still ask again, does he really meant what you think.
Author:
Ephraim D.
Source:
Our psychology
No comments:
Post a Comment