Skip to main content

An aspect of heated religious discussions: Psychological Projection

+
JMJ

In some heated discussions with ntCatholics (non-Traditional Catholics), my wife and I noticed that our interlocutors would accuse us of a particular action or fault. A fault that, upon later reflection, we relaised they were themselves guilty.

This behaviour has a name: Psychological Projection.

Here's an excerpt from the Wikipedia article:
Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually intolerant may constantly accuse other people of being intolerant. It incorporates blame shifting.
As noted, in my experience, in the heat of the moment, we don't usually realise that a person is 'projecting' a behaviour on us.  Everytime that I've realised that this was happening it was after the discussion ... or after a series of discussions.


This is similar to a behaviour that I've noted in people diagnosed with Schizophrenia. Nothing is their fault, everyone else is to blame. 

So now that you know that 'projection' is a thing, how do you deal with it?

An excellent question. 

Here's my thoughts:
  1. Stay calm during arguments and try to stay 'above' the drama.
    1.  In some cases there will be anger, lashing out .  Look at the bigger picture.  This should be easier if you've had a number of discussions with the person.  
  2. Point out the facts to the individual.
    1. This may or may not work.  If the person has a strong belief (see cognitive dissonance) they are going to go to great lengths to protect their perception of reality.
  3. Watch for patterns in the discussion.
    1.  This is where it is helpful to have a series of discussions.  In cases where we successfully realized that 'projection' was at play, the discussions were over a period of weeks or even months. 
  4. Watch for wild accusations violent 'thrown' at you like verbal darts. 
    1. The goal seems to be to put you off balance.  Take a breath and ask the following question: I don't understand, what prompted that question / accusation.
    2. You'll probably need to probe a number of times to get to the real reasons (5 why's might help and here's another article Root Cause Analysis 5 Whys).  Although, to avoid a defensive reaction, I suggest rephrasing the question without the word "WHY".



Just some thoughts!

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...

De Fide Teachings of the Catholic Church (Updated)

+ JMJ  Update: I was reviewing Ott's work directly and noted that some of the Teachings are De Fide while others are different levels of authority (such as Sent Certa etc).  So please refer to Ott for the actual classification). Posts Listing the Dogmas of the Catholic Church Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader (Oct 2022) Updated List of Teachings of the Catholic Church (Oct 2021) *** Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (Oct 2015) De Fide teaching of the Catholic Church (Apr 2013)           *** Latest version