Quotes About Groupthink

Quotes tagged as "groupthink" (showing 1-16 of 16)
Anthon St. Maarten
“There is no need for us all to be alike and think the same way, neither do we need a common enemy to force us to come together and reach out to each other. If we allow ourselves and everyone else the freedom to fully individuate as spiritual beings in human form, there will be no need for us to be forced by worldly circumstances to take hands and stand together. Our souls will automatically want to flock together, like moths to the flame of our shared Divinity, yet each with wings covered in the glimmering colors and unique patterns of our individual human expression.”
Anthon St. Maarten

“For it is dangerous to attach one's self to the crowd in front, and so long as each one of us is more willing to trust another than to judge for himself, we never show any judgement in the matter of living, but always a blind trust, and a mistake that has been passed on from hand to hand finally involves us and works our destruction. It is the example of other people that is our undoing; let us merely separate ourselves from the crowd, and we shall be made whole. But as it is, the populace,, defending its own iniquity, pits itself against reason. And so we see the same thing happening that happens at the elections, where, when the fickle breeze of popular favour has shifted, the very same persons who chose the praetors wonder that those praetors were chosen.”

Jess C. Scott
“Alice is fictional. This isn't.”
Jess C. Scott, Zombie Mania: A Zombie Apocalypse Parody

Ayn Rand
“But I still wonder how it was possible, in those graceless years of transition, long ago, that men did not see whither they were going, and went on, in blindness and cowardice”
Ayn Rand, Anthem

Paula Stokes
“Maybe you think you’re just one person. What you do doesn’t really matter. You can read a few tweets or blog posts and then publicly render your judgment of a total stranger. Who cares? You’re just one tiny voice in a huge ocean. But the thing about tiny voices is that when they band together they can be incredibly loud. Uncomfortably loud. Sometimes that’s a good thing—a strong thing. A group of voices can wake people up to the truth. But a group of voices can be a bad thing too, because we’re not always right. Or even when we are right, sometimes the things we do to each other still aren’t okay.”
Paula Stokes, This is How it Happened

Christopher Hitchens
“Many things in this period have been hard to bear, or hard to take seriously. My own profession went into a protracted swoon during the Reagan-Bush-Thatcher decade, and shows scant sign of recovering a critical faculty—or indeed any faculty whatever, unless it is one of induced enthusiasm for a plausible consensus President. (We shall see whether it counts as progress for the same parrots to learn a new word.) And my own cohort, the left, shared in the general dispiriting move towards apolitical, atonal postmodernism. Regarding something magnificent, like the long-overdue and still endangered South African revolution (a jagged fit in the supposedly smooth pattern of axiomatic progress), one could see that Ariadne’s thread had a robust reddish tinge, and that potential citizens had not all deconstructed themselves into Xhosa, Zulu, Cape Coloured or ‘Eurocentric’; had in other words resisted the sectarian lesson that the masters of apartheid tried to teach them. Elsewhere, though, it seemed all at once as if competitive solipsism was the signifier of the ‘radical’; a stress on the salience not even of the individual, but of the trait, and from that atomization into the lump of the category. Surely one thing to be learned from the lapsed totalitarian system was the unwholesome relationship between the cult of the masses and the adoration of the supreme personality. Yet introspective voyaging seemed to coexist with dull group-think wherever one peered about among the formerly ‘committed’.

Traditionally then, or tediously as some will think, I saw no reason to discard the Orwellian standard in considering modern literature. While a sort of etiolation, tricked out as playfulness, had its way among the non-judgemental, much good work was still done by those who weighed words as if they meant what they said. Some authors, indeed, stood by their works as if they had composed them in solitude and out of conviction. Of these, an encouraging number spoke for the ironic against the literal mind; for the generously interpreted interest of all against the renewal of what Orwell termed the ‘smelly little orthodoxies’—tribe and Faith, monotheist and polytheist, being most conspicuous among these new/old disfigurements. In the course of making a film about the decaffeinated hedonism of modern Los Angeles, I visited the house where Thomas Mann, in another time of torment, wrote Dr Faustus. My German friends were filling the streets of Munich and Berlin to combat the recrudescence of the same old shit as I read:

This old, folkish layer survives in us all, and to speak as I really think, I do. not consider religion the most adequate means of keeping it under lock and key. For that, literature alone avails, humanistic science, the ideal of the free and beautiful human being. [italics mine]

The path to this concept of enlightenment is not to be found in the pursuit of self-pity, or of self-love. Of course to be merely a political animal is to miss Mann’s point; while, as ever, to be an apolitical animal is to leave fellow-citizens at the mercy of Ideolo’. For the sake of argument, then, one must never let a euphemism or a false consolation pass uncontested. The truth seldom lies, but when it does lie it lies somewhere in between.”
Christopher Hitchens, For the Sake of Argument: Essays and Minority Reports

Erich Fromm
“What kind of men, then, does our society need? What is the "social character" suited to twentieth century Capitalism? It needs men who co-operate smoothly in large groups; who want to consume more and more, and whose tasks are standardized and can easily be influenced and anticipated. It needs men who feel free and independent, not subject to any authority, or principle, or conscience - yet willing to be commanded, to do what is expected, to fit into the social machine without friction.”
Erich Fromm, The Sane Society

“Socialism is "group-think." How uninformed in history do you have to be to advocate for "group-think"??”
A.E. Samaan

Paul Gibbons
“That which a team does not want to discuss, it most needs to discuss.”
Paul Gibbons, The Science of Successful Organizational Change: How Leaders Set Strategy, Change Behavior, and Create an Agile Culture

Paul Gibbons
“All of us are not always smarter than one of us, leaders need to distinguish between the wisdom of crowds and the madness of crowds.”
Paul Gibbons, The Science of Successful Organizational Change: How Leaders Set Strategy, Change Behavior, and Create an Agile Culture

Kelseyleigh Reber
“Without their uniforms, they were probably nobodies, rejects. Give a man a uniform. Give him a few sparkly badges, a purpose, a gun ... and suddenly, he was no longer just another kid trying to make it through life without being ridiculed. Suddenly, he was a part of something. Something important. Something powerful. Something greater than he could ever be on his own. It was amazing how empowering the group could be.”
Kelseyleigh Reber, If I Resist

شريف عرفة
“في إجتماعات الشركات، قد يميل الموظف لموافقة الرأي السائد في الإجتماع و هو ما يُسمى التفكير الجمعي و هو يعوق التفكير الإبداعي و خروج الأفكار الجديدة لذلك تعطي بعض الشركات أولوية الحديث في الإجتماعات للموظفين الأقل درجة، كي لا يتأثروا بآراء رؤسائهم”
شريف عرفة, كيف تصبح إنساناً؟ .. ما بعد التنمية الذاتية

“Universal opinions are often mistaken for universal principles”
Seth Czerepak, The 24 Hour Marketing Miracle: The FIRST Marketing Book EVER to Be Backed Up By a 500% Money Back Guarantee

Narcissismus Decimus Maximus
“Sheep wish no taste but woolly sweet conformity.”
Narcissismus Decimus Maximus

Kevin Dutton
“В 1952 году социолог Уильям Уайт изобрел термин «групповое мышление» (отсутствие личного мнения, шаблонное мышление — groupthink). Этот термин описывает механизм, обеспечивающий тесную сплоченность групп, их отрезанность от внешних влияний, быстрое согласие в отношении нормативно «правильных» положений и полную потерю чувствительности к критике: безразличие к другим мнениям индивидов, не являющихся членами группы, враждебное отношение к расхождению взглядов внутри группы и усиление уверенности в собственной непогрешимости. Психолог Ирвин Джейнис, который много занимался эмпирическими исследованиями этого явления, так описывает этот процесс: «Образ мышления, которому подвержены люди, входящие в состав консолидированной группы (“группы своих”), при котором стремление членов группы к единообразию перевешивает их мотивацию к реалистической оценке альтернативных образов действий».
Групповое мышление явно не способствует принятию оптимальных решений.”
Kevin Dutton, The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success

Steven Pinker
“The psychological components of war have not gone away—dominance, vengeance, callousness, tribalism, groupthink, self-deception”
Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

All Quotes | My Quotes | Add A Quote

Browse By Tag