5
$\begingroup$

In psychology and logic, rationalization or rationalisation (also known as making excuses[1]) is a defense mechanism in which controversial behaviors or feelings are justified and explained in a seemingly rational or logical manner to avoid the true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable – or even admirable and superior – by plausible means.[2] It is also an informal fallacy of reasoning.[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28psychology%29

Is it possible to objectively recognize that someone is rationalizing?

Is it possible to make an individual realize that s\he is rationalizing when it happens?

Is it possible to assess an individual's tendency to rationalize?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Research:

Rationalization is a defence mechanism - a Freudian construct that is still in common use in clinical psychology, but no longer used much in research, so current studies about such mechanisms are hard to come by.

To some degree, rationalization has been superseded by cognitive dissonance, and related self-perception theory. This is a more general theory about rationalizing that includes normal, healthy ways of dealing with internal conflict, as well as pathological forms. However, this line of research has focused mostly on theorized unconscious rationalizing, rather than verbal explanations provided by subjects. There are many other lines of research into verbalized non-pathological rationalizing, which is very common.

Therapy:

Clinicians are specially trained to detect many varieties of rationalization in patients, including minimisation, intellectualization, and sour grapes. In general, the idea is to look for inconsistencies or contradictions in the patient's descriptions of their thinking. For example, a patient might say: "Cheating on my spouse was a desperate call for attention." That might sound logical at first blush, but then why hide it? Or why not choose a healthier way to get attention? Freud's daughter Anna compiled the definitive guide to diagnosis and treatment, and there is a more current alternative here.

Confronting patients with inconsistencies in their thinking is a common part of several traditions of therapy. One of the hallmarks of many personality disorders is patients' inability to recognize or failure to admit to the inconsistencies in their thinking. For most patients without symptoms of a personality disorder however, it is expected that they should confront, recognize, accept, and ultimately find healthier alternatives to their maladaptive defence mechanisms.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ is the concept scientific/measurable/falsifiable? $\endgroup$ – Ooker Feb 26 '19 at 11:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.