The attacks for the United States about September 14, 2001 were the immediate result of the failure individuals agencies, which range from the White House to airport security, to recognize weaknesses present in the many symptoms. The main reason these vulnerabilities were not known and mended is that these types of various organizations were trapped in a cognitive dissonance cycle of thinking. After the Cool War, terrorism was seen as an regional issue (9/11 Commission, 92). Virtually all terrorist organizations were possibly groups subsidized by governments or partisan trying to generate governments (i. e. Middle east Liberation Organization). As a result, the tactics employed for fighting terrorism were central mostly in the centre East and were limited to task causes and field training by the US. The US ground pushes were rarely used and, when applied, were limited to small task pressure type tasks. Furthermore, a majority of terrorist situations prior to 9/11 usually ended in negotiations (9/11 Commission, 94). Because the authorities felt that this had a good understanding of how terrorist situations occurred in the post frosty war period, warning signs on the eve on 9/11 were ignored. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had a comparable point of view when it comes to security. The machine they had in place by 9/11 was apparently successful, for they had averted hostage scenarios for a decade. Furthermore, air carriers were underneath increasing pressure to lower the price tag on flights and make looking at in and out of airports more efficient, which obviously led to secureness problems (Easterbrook, 164). The FAA and major airlines felt that there was simply no reason to solve a operating system, and was incapable to make alterations anyway as a result of economic stresses.
An uncomfortable state of anxiety is brought on when contradictions occur in the cognitive system. People are therefore motivated to lessen or remove this stress state, which is known as cognitive dissonance (Larson, 29). For example , a man who eats three or more hamburgers daily might some day find out that eating food loaded with fat boosts the likelihood of cardiovascular disease. Because he wants them, the person believes that eating hamburgers is good (if something is pleasurable, why didn't it be good? ). At this point he is informed to believe that eating burgers is poor. Thus comes up cognitive dissonance. People have a couple of beliefs that is organized and logical. When information is usually introduced that contradicts all those beliefs people have a tendency to react in many ways to reduce the inconstancy with which they have been shown. 1) A person can change his behavior (Larson, 30): the man mentioned above can stop eating hamburgers. 2) A big change in environment could happen (Larson, 30): the man can start ingesting fat cost-free hamburgers. 3) More constant beliefs (some might phone them rationalizations) could be included in the a person's cognitive system (Larson, 30); the man can tell himself that he is around the Atkins' diet and ingesting the burgers will allow him to lose weight and for that reason be more healthy (not the right conclusion to draw from the information, but one which fits the man's logic).
The effects of dissonance can adjust the way in which a person collects information. A person can develop a picky attention course where he only pays attention to material that reinforces his accepted intellectual system. Model of all materials could also be skewed to fit that person's pair of beliefs, making a selective model system (Larson, 31). When ever these methods are put on the subject of foreign policy, the negative effects are obvious. For instance , leaders may hold on to a belief system that is will no longer valid. In the 1980s, the US viewed the USSR armed service power while threatening despite the fact that they were helpless. (Larson, 32) As a result, the us government wasted vast amounts on the Superstar Wars airborne missile defense system that could have already been spent on additional programs. An additional example...
Dialects refers to just how words will be pronounced. Your demographic position and social class may affect your dialect; how you enunciate and state certain words. I…...Read