= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Ego syntonic thoughts and values - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (53)
Thanks for the rephrasing. I now understand MixedNuts' question better.
I don't think the purpose of the ego syntonic/dystonic distinction is to get rid of guilt, but to create a more socially acceptable framing, which may accompany guilt.
Consider the case of a pastor with homosexual urges. If they're mild, he can hide it from himself. If they're stronger, and he engages in homosexual behavior, he can't. If he gets caught, then he'll probably phrase it as "I get these temptations, can't do anything about it" instead of as "Yeah, turns out I'm a homosexual and following the Bible isn't that important to me", go to some sort of 'therapy', and be forgiven while continuing to hold most of his previous beliefs about himself. He'll probably still feel guilty about it either way.
(nods) Agreed in principle.
Though it's worth noting that the threshold for self-deception isn't quite as low as you suggest. There exist pastors (and non-pastors) who engage in same-sex sex acts but maintain a heterosexual self-image, or who engage in opposite-sex sex acts but maintain an ascetic self-image. One easy way to do this, for example, is to ascribe all the agency to their sex partners ("I'm straight/celibate, but that tempter/temptress seduced me"), or the situation ("...but I'd had a few drinks too many"), or to more complicated ontological entities (e.g., Satan). That way they get to reframe themselves as helpless-and-blameless.