Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Institutional self-deception

View through CrossRef
There are many examples of institutions which have made false claims, or performed certain acts, that have had, to varying degrees, a negative impact on their societies. For example, many corporations go to great lengths to present themselves as being environmentally friendly when in fact they are not. Many corporations have also been forced to recall dangerous products which they at one time or another insisted were safe. Research teams have misled participants with regard to what they can expect from their participation in studies, with grave consequences. Governments throughout the world are mired in corruption, and yet deny that this is so. One possible explanation is that in such situations these institutions are simply lying. However, another possible explanation is that these institutions are self-deceived, or lying to themselves. Recently it has been suggested that self-deception is something that affects certain groups as well as individuals. Given that institutions can wield a great deal of political, social and economic power, if institutions are capable of self-deception there is room for things to go awry on a very large scale with potentially dire consequences. Yet the explanations currently on offer for group-level self-deception appear to amount to instances of individual self-deception (either to certain key individual members of those groups being self-deceived, or to all or most members of a group sharing the same self-deceptive belief), and as such I do not regard the explanations currently on offer as satisfactory. I propose that there are certain situations in which we ought to see institutions themselves as self-deceived or lying to themselves. While the terms ‘self-deception’ and ‘lying to oneself’ are often used interchangeably, I differentiate between the two and argue that both institutional self-deception and an institution lying to itself are institution-level phenomena, and do not rely on any individual within the institution being self-deceived or lying to themselves. That this is so is of relevance to our attributions of accountability, and makes changes to institutional structure and procedures the focus of concern when it comes to preventing an institution succumbing to self-deception or lying to itself.
Title: Institutional self-deception
Description:
There are many examples of institutions which have made false claims, or performed certain acts, that have had, to varying degrees, a negative impact on their societies.
For example, many corporations go to great lengths to present themselves as being environmentally friendly when in fact they are not.
Many corporations have also been forced to recall dangerous products which they at one time or another insisted were safe.
Research teams have misled participants with regard to what they can expect from their participation in studies, with grave consequences.
Governments throughout the world are mired in corruption, and yet deny that this is so.
One possible explanation is that in such situations these institutions are simply lying.
However, another possible explanation is that these institutions are self-deceived, or lying to themselves.
Recently it has been suggested that self-deception is something that affects certain groups as well as individuals.
Given that institutions can wield a great deal of political, social and economic power, if institutions are capable of self-deception there is room for things to go awry on a very large scale with potentially dire consequences.
Yet the explanations currently on offer for group-level self-deception appear to amount to instances of individual self-deception (either to certain key individual members of those groups being self-deceived, or to all or most members of a group sharing the same self-deceptive belief), and as such I do not regard the explanations currently on offer as satisfactory.
I propose that there are certain situations in which we ought to see institutions themselves as self-deceived or lying to themselves.
While the terms ‘self-deception’ and ‘lying to oneself’ are often used interchangeably, I differentiate between the two and argue that both institutional self-deception and an institution lying to itself are institution-level phenomena, and do not rely on any individual within the institution being self-deceived or lying to themselves.
That this is so is of relevance to our attributions of accountability, and makes changes to institutional structure and procedures the focus of concern when it comes to preventing an institution succumbing to self-deception or lying to itself.

Related Results

Studi Deskriptif Perilaku Online Deception pada Mahasiswa Pengguna Instagram
Studi Deskriptif Perilaku Online Deception pada Mahasiswa Pengguna Instagram
Abstract. The development of information and communication technology has changed the social interaction patterns of Indonesian society. Instagram as one of the dominant platforms ...
Is a Fitbit a Diary? Self-Tracking and Autobiography
Is a Fitbit a Diary? Self-Tracking and Autobiography
Data becomes something of a mirror in which people see themselves reflected. (Sorapure 270)In a 2014 essay for The New Yorker, the humourist David Sedaris recounts an obsession spu...
Does Social Media Provoked to Cyber Deception? An Illustrative Based Study of Youth
Does Social Media Provoked to Cyber Deception? An Illustrative Based Study of Youth
Purpose: The present study was conducted with the sole aim to explore the role of social media in promotion of cyber deception among youth which further lead to deviance among the ...
Self-deception
Self-deception
In this paper I defend non-intentional conception of self-deception. First, I?ll make clear distinction between deceiving, lying, and deluding. Then, taking Cartesian metodol...
Deception-Based Security Framework for IoT: An Empirical Study
Deception-Based Security Framework for IoT: An Empirical Study
<p><b>A large number of Internet of Things (IoT) devices in use has provided a vast attack surface. The security in IoT devices is a significant challenge considering c...
Deception in Amber Heard and Johnny Depp’s Trials
Deception in Amber Heard and Johnny Depp’s Trials
Deception is defined as a linguistic and non-linguistic behavior that is used in interaction in order to make the addressees believe what is believed to be false or lack evidence. ...
A normative account of self-deception, overconfidence, and paranoia
A normative account of self-deception, overconfidence, and paranoia
Self-deception, paranoia, and overconfidence involve misbeliefs about self, others, and world. They are often considered mistaken. Here we explore whether they might be adaptive, a...

Back to Top