Analysis Of Carol Tavris And Aronson's Mistakes Were Made

In the book, Mistakes Were Made (but not by me), Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson are able to showcase true life accounts of people that have made wrong decisions that were either unacceptable or completely terrible, who justified their actions as if they did nothing wrong. People do this because as humans, it is too complicated for us to admit that we have done something wrong, so instead we like to cover ourselves up with justifications. This then causes for the person to make the assumption that they have not made a mistake, but instead that others that surround them do.
Each person has someone to help them make choices, whether it be a personal advisor, a partner, a whole community, they are there to assist, but usually, people like to …show more content…
Naturally, the brain has them, but the trick of the brain is to make us think that we do not have them at all. The dissonance theory, which is the belief that we have to reduce dissonance by justifications, is in a sense the theory of the blind spots. We intentionally blind ourselves so that we don’t receive information that lets us know of the what we are doing. Naive realism for example, is the belief that one is always right, objective, and unbiased under any circumstances. Sometimes we view ourselves as people that can pitch out any idea, and that each individual will immediately jump on board, but that is not always the case. It is actually a rare occasion if every person agrees with one single idea. Blind spots like these tend to be unaware of to the mind, and although we can’t prevent them from happening, we must learn to be aware of them both psychologically and optically to prevent harm to others. If not, it can lead to unethical and reckless behavior. Money, pride, hatred, and ethnocentrism are more examples of blind spots that we generally don’t realize that blind us, and change how we act with others, but by realizing our actions and weaknesses it is less possible to cause an