It is an interesting book about human psychology and how we go about justifying things in our heads. The factual information is thin compared to the number of so-so examples in the book.

A book of and for our times. It's a deep dive into cognitive dissonance and self justification. Everyone should read this as it explains so much about the status of our current political, medical, police and education systems. Unfortunately the people who could benefit the most from reading this book probably won't read it or if they do they won't understand that it applies to everyone, even themselves.

My favorite quote of the book: “Most people, when directly confronted by evidence that they are wrong, do not change their point of view or course of action but justify it even more tenaciously. Even irrefutable evidence is rarely enough to pierce the mental armor of self-justification.”

I have copied the cover blurb because it is accurate:

"Why do people dodge responsibility when things fall apart? Why the parade of public figures unable to own up when they screw up? Why the endless marital quarrels over who is right? Why can we see hypocrisy in others but not in ourselves? Are we all liars? Or do we really believe the stories we tell?

Renowned social psychologists Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson take a compelling look into how the brain is wired for self-justification. When we make mistakes, we must calm the cognitive dissonance that jars our feelings of self-worth. And so we create fictions that absolve us of responsibility, restoring our belief that we are smart, moral, and right -- a belief that often keeps us on a course that is dumb, immoral, and wrong.

Backed by years of research and delivered in lively, energetic prose, Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) offers a fascinating explanation of self-deception -- how it works, the harm it can cause, and how we can overcome it."

The authors use the phrase "cognitive dissonance" as a single label to describe the many ways of why people squirm away from their responsibility, and sometimes openly refusing, to use reason/moral clarity in thinking through issues/emotions, as well as refusing to acknowledge any self-recognition they may have rashly made a judgement without facts or have chosen to act immorally or to support immorality.

The chapters are:

-Cognitive Dissonance: The Engine of Self-Justification
-Pride and Prejudice....and Other Blind Spots
-Memory, the Self-Justifying Historian
-Good Intentions, Bad Science: The Closed Loop of Clinical Judgement
-Law and Disorder
-Love's Assassin: Self-Justification in a Marriage
-Wounds, Rifts, and Wars
-Letting Go and Owning Up
-Dissonance, Democracy and the Demagogue


The book has an extensive Notes and Index section.

Doesn't the news just seem like one neverending finger-pointing game? Enter this book. This was a fascinating read and well worth the time. There were chapters on relationships, leadership, etc.* Particularly interesting was the information regarding the malleability of memory. I didn't like seeing myself in the mirror, but it's better than not.

There should be a sequel on how to forgive those who admit to mistakes... because we live in a culture where "you can't judge me, I'm only human" but everyone else should be 100% perfect.

This book is basically a series of anecdotes about people who thought they were doing great but were fucking up massively, and instead of recognizing their mistakes blamed others when things went wrong. So it would be a perfect read for 90% of the League of Legends player base, as well as the President.

The prose isn't great - it goes back and forth between trying to be poetic and being overly casual, and I struggled to finish the book. However, the examples are usually backed up with research, and the authors make a lot of interesting points about the fallibility of our brains and the lengths we'll go to justify decisions we make, even terrible ones.

Basically, this is a book about cognitive dissonance, which is defined as: “an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously.” The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

In other words, most people, when confronted by evidence that they are wrong, do not change their point of view or course of action but justify it even more tenaciously. Even irrefutable evidence is rarely enough to overcome self-justification.

Chapters focus on prejudices and blind spots, psychology, politics, law, and personal relationships. By far, the most fascinating sections for me were those dealing with politics, law, and the relationship between cognitive dissonance and self-esteem.

If you’ve ever wondered how politicians justify taking large kickbacks and bribes, the authors explain it: corruption happens with one small, innocent step (having lunch with a constituent) and, through cognitive dissonance, snowballs into accepting an all-expenses paid golfing trip to St. Andrews from a lobbyist. As the authors state, “Politicians are the most visible of self-justifiers, which is why they provide such juicy examples. They have the refined art of speaking in the passive voice; when their backs are to the wall they will reluctantly acknowledge error, but not responsibility.”

The law section includes the complicated issues of eyewitness and expert testimony, the problems with current interrogation methods, and the controversy of repressed memory syndrome and its use as legal evidence.

Regarding dissonance and esteem, interestingly enough those with more humility (and/or lower self-esteem), because they tend to allow for divergent opinions and don’t stick to their guns as often as people with high self-esteem (or downright arrogance), have far fewer problems with cognitive dissonance. Special mention also needs to be made of the pithy (and humorous) anecdote on page 41 relating a visit to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles.

The science in the book is well-documented yet very accessible to a wide range of readers. Someone in my book group chose this as a selection, and it made for a lively and engaging discussion. I would definitely recommend it!

Excellent

Great book!lots of insights and examples of human behavior. Definitely worth reading.ends with an analysis of Trump and his behavior.

Really interesting and enlightening.

Safe to say this book messed me up

A little long, and redundant, but still interesting.