When you submit a forum posting, be sure to use the “CAPCON SYSTEM,” described below
Your forum grades depend on how well you learn and show you’ve learned CONCEPTS introduced in your textbook. To do this you must use the CAPCON system for all assignments. Whenever you are applying a TEXTBOOK CONCEPT, type it in ALL CAPS. Also, whenever you apply a TEXTBOOK CONCEPT, don’t just “name drop” it. That is, don’t just state the concept. You have to explain what the concept is and how it applies. Be sure to note the video you are discussing.
I saw the video on an astrologer reading someone’s personality. It was so fake I could tell he was making it up!
VIDEO VIEWED: This is a review of Jon Smith’s video on Astrology. Mr. Smith, the astrologer, claimed to use his client’s horoscope to predict that “something good will happen in the future” and that the client “recently had an accident.” In term of the textbook, the astrologer’s reading use using two tricks: VAGUE READINGS that can be interpreted in any way, and UNIVERSAL FACTS that apply to nearly everyone (nearly everyone has had a recent accident, even a small one.”
Find examples of text group think concepts in the segment from the video segments: “12 Angry Men,” the Asch Conformity Experiment, and Jonestown. 300 words minimum. How many “symptoms of groupthink” from p. 52 can you identify? Explain each symptom you identify.
Be sure to BE CONCRETE with SPECIFIC QUOTE AND EXAMPLES. Explain why you think your chosen quote or incident reflects the concept you identified. Use the CAPCON system. Identify what video you are discussing.
I watched one of the videos with a bunch of men talking. They seemed to have made up their mind before talking. That was bad. I noticed some were criticizing and pressuring other to simply go along with the majority.
I watched “12 angry men.” This was about a jury of 12 jurors debating the death penalty for the defendant. One juror was the holdout, not voting with the majority. Another applied pressure, saying something like “Come on, I have to go.” That juror was a MINDGUARD because he was “protecting the group from dissent.”
two responses to classmate
During the viewing of the movie “12 Angry men”, I found the juror who was anxious to go to the baseball game was SELF-CENSORSHIP because he refrained from CRITICAL THINKING. This individual did not care about the consequences of the accused, because he wanted to get to the baseball game. So, when the first group agreed to vote “guilty or not guilty”, he voted guilty, just as the other 10 did, but he was anxious to leave. By saying that, it seems as if CRITICAL THINKING was the furthest thing from this juror’s mind.
I viewed the “Asch Conformity Experiment”. As the false participants agreed on the obviously wrong answers that were shown to them, the lone true participant agreed with the false participants. Clearly, the lone participant did this to escape the embarrassment of disagreeing with the others. As most people realize, no one wants to be a loner in front of strangers. However, when another lone participant wrote his answers down on paper, he chose the correct ones (feeling the courage to do so, silently). This shows the ILLUSION OF UNANIMITY because all the false participants were in agreement, knowing what they were saying was false. Most individuals can relate to answering in silence. Most shy or introverted individuals despise being singled out. When they feel inferior to others, they will agree just to feel common and less like an outsider.
I watched the “Jonestown”. The members believed, literally, everything their leader Jim Jones said. The members were abiding by his beliefs, doing what he told them to do (married women having kids by him, praising him, blatantly disregarding the consequences of their livelihood and drinking poison). By doing that, it shows they were ILLUSION OF INVULNERABILITY because they failed to note dangers and displayed excessive risky optimism.
22 hours ago
ELEVATOR VIDEO: I have to admit, in the elevator scenario, even I would’ve started to question whether the other passengers knew some thing I didn’t about which door would open. However, I probably would have just asked if the other door was going to open on the other floors. I know many people probably would not and would simply succumb to the PRESSURE FOR CONFORMITY even though there was no verbal argument for it. I think the subjects might have also given in to the ILLUSION OF UNANIMITY. Their “silence” or changing the direction they were facing showed “consent” even though they seemed to be conflicted and confused.
12 ANGRY MEN: I found these movie clips fascinating and see many of the concepts depicted in the videos in real life nearly every day. It can be in simple things, like trying to get my kids to agree on a restaurant, or in more relevant situations like not wanting to be the one to stick up for the kid being bullied even though you know it’s the right thing to do and you feel bad for him or her. There were MINDGUARDS AND PRESSURE FOR CONFORMITY at play after the vote was taken just from wanting to hurry jury members along so everyone could see the game that night. One member kept referring to the boy on trial and “them” using EXCESSIVE STEREOTYPING and several members tried to use COLLECTIVE RATIONALIZATION. What struck me the most was the ILLUSION OF MORALITY. A boy could be sentenced to death and they barely paused to consider the verdict for an entire minute before the first vote!
ASH CONFORMITY: I can’t say I’m surprised that people might shy away from standing out in these experiments, but I’m surprised that there were so many different reasons for doing so. This clip showed the power of GROUPTHINK through PRESSURE TO CONFORM, SELF-CENSORSHIP and the ILLUSION OF UNANIMITY.
JONESTOWN: These clips were incredibly hard for me to watch (and the audio gave my chills). As a narrator mentioned, people don’t join cults. They simply find a place they feel they belong, and are accepted, and are with other like-minded individuals. They were searching for meaning and purpose and Jones was more than happy to provide that for them. He used ILLUSIONS OF INNVULNERABILITY and MORALITY to persuade them he was righteous and would “show them the way”. There was obviously CLOSE-MINDEDNESS if hundreds of people failed to see the harm in poisoning children and shooting a congressman. Jim Jones himself had to be the epitome of a MINDGUARD. I can only imagine there were several other appointed MINDGUARDS as well. It must have been a bit easier to control information to the congregation once they were all corralled in Guyana