Conflicting Thoughts example essay topic

Putting Theories into Practice In politics, humans seem to be very contradictory towards one another. Many situations allot for disagreement as well as interesting discussions and conversations. I was watching the presidential debate when my girlfriend started shedding her opinion, which I didn't quite agree with. It was as if she ignored what one candidate said and believed the other because there was a bias in her thinking. That, along with what each candidate was saying was causing sway in my opinion and I felt discomfort. I chose Cognitive Dissonance Theory for this incident due to the conflicting ideas going on in my head during this situation.

When she started making biased comments about whatever a particular candidate said, I had conflicting thoughts that go right along with the dissonant relationship aspect of the Cognitive Dissonance Theory. I thought that in order to make a decision you need to know everything that happens not just bits and pieces of it, but what conflicted with this thought was her biased comment that was based solely on one statement. What I was after to make my own thoughts and judgments agreeable was to arrive at some level of consistent thoughts within myself as to how I can alleviate the tension. The reason for this dissonance was because of outside sources that led me to take action that caused an effect. But after the discussion with the other person I found myself trying to achieve consonance and reduce dissonance because of my discomfort. In essence I was trying to convince myself that I should try and find some compromise with what she was saying so the conflict would cease to exist.

In order for the conflict to stop and cope with the dissonance my attitude had to change, which led me after the conversation to seek out selective exposure. This meant I had to seek information not present at that time to help reduce the dissonance within myself and stop the arguing between her and myself. From what she was saying I also sought out a different type of perception, selective interpretation. From the ambiguous information she offered I tried to compromise and make some of it consistent to my own thoughts that could help further to end the dissonance. The ultimate tactic I used that I wasn't even aware of until I saw this term was minimal justification. The minimal incentive given in this case was just me saying, "I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want you to see the whole picture before you pass judgment".

And with those words the conflict ended, in other words consonance was found, I found an equal plane in which both her and my thoughts could feel comfortable. Relational Dialectics Theory would be another way of looking at this situation. Amidst our conversation there was a pulling into what she was saying in terms of not starting any conflict in the first place because my main concern was to listen to the debate and not engage in any conversation. But there was a pushing in me to just blurt out that she is wrong for making decisions based on one comment said by a candidate. Because I decided to take action and say something, it had an affect on her that corresponds with the idea of totality. The idea of autonomy and connection to a lesser degree was also going on among us.

All in one, I wanted her to be there but at the same time I didn't because of her comments and judgments. I was trying to debate on whether or not to be able to tell her to leave which would leave me in a vulnerable spot or be in a way strategic as to how I could get her to quiet down and just listen, which in turn would give me the peace and quiet needed in order to achieve my objective, which was to listen intently on each presidential candidates' views on issues to make a more coherent decision as to which one I would vote for.