Which LDS distortions have you noticed?

[_Amore]

I've considered some cognitive distortions that the LDS church has ingrained in me, especially polarized thinking, but I wonder if there are some ways which I've missed.

Which of the following thinking distortions have you noticed taught in church (or society in general)?

Always being right
Being wrong is unthinkable. This cognitive distortion is characterized by actively trying to prove one's actions or thoughts to be correct, while sometimes prioritizing self-interest over the feelings of another person.

Blaming
The opposite of personalization; holding other people responsible for the harm they cause, and especially for their intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress on us.
Example: someone blames their spouse entirely for marital problems, instead of looking at his/her own part in the problems.

Disqualifying the positive
Discounting positive events.
Example: Upon receiving a congratulation, a person dismisses it out-of-hand, believing it to be undeserved, and automatically interpreting the compliment (at least inwardly) as an attempt at flattery or perhaps as arising out of naïveté.

Emotional reasoning
Presuming that negative feelings expose the true nature of things, and experiencing reality as a reflection of emotionally linked thoughts. Thinking something is true, solely based on a feeling.
Example: "I feel (i.e. think that I am) stupid or boring, therefore I must be." Or, feeling that fear of flying in planes means planes are a very dangerous way to travel. Or, concluding that it's hopeless to clean one's house due to being overwhelmed by the prospect of cleaning.

Fallacy of change
Relying on social control to obtain cooperative actions from another person.

Fallacy of fairness
Becoming guilty when one acts against justice or upset when someone else acts unjustly.

Filtering
Focusing entirely on negative elements of a situation, to the exclusion of the positive. Also, the brain's tendency to filter out information which does not conform to already held beliefs.
Example: After receiving comments about a work presentation, a person focuses on the single critical comment and ignores what went well.

Jumping to conclusions
Reaching preliminary conclusions (usually negative) from little (if any) evidence. Two specific subtypes are identified:
Mind reading: Inferring a person's possible or probable (usually negative) thoughts from their behavior and nonverbal communication; taking precautions against the worst reasonably suspected case or some other preliminary conclusion, without asking the person.
Example: A student assumes the readers of their paper have already made up their mind concerning its topic, and therefore writing the paper is a pointless exercise.

Fortune-telling: predicting outcomes (usually negative) of events. Example: Being convinced of failure before a test, when the student is in fact prepared.

Labeling and mislabeling
A more severe type of overgeneralization; attributing a person's actions to their character instead of some accidental attribute. Rather than assuming the behavior to be accidental or extrinsic, the person assigns a label to someone or something that implies the character of that person or thing. Mislabeling involves describing an event with language that has a strong connotation of a person's evaluation of the event.
Example of "labeling": Instead of believing that you made a mistake, you believe that you are a loser, because only a loser would make that kind of mistake. Or, someone who made a bad first impression is a "jerk", in the absence of some more specific cause.

Magnification and minimization
Giving proportionally greater weight to a perceived failure, weakness or threat, or lesser weight to a perceived success, strength or opportunity, so the weight differs from that assigned to the event or thing by others. This is common enough in the normal population to popularize idioms such as "make a mountain out of a molehill". In depressed clients, often the positive characteristics of other people are exaggerated and negative characteristics are understated. There is one subtype of magnification:
Catastrophizing – Giving greater weight to the worst possible outcome, however unlikely, or experiencing a situation as unbearable or impossible when it is just uncomfortable. Example: A teenager is too afraid to start driver's training because he believes he would get himself into an accident.

Overgeneralization
Making hasty generalizations from insufficient experiences and evidence. Making a very broad conclusion based on a single incident or a single piece of evidence. If something bad happens only once, it is expected to happen over and over again.
Example: A person is lonely and often spends most of her time at home. Her friends sometimes ask her to come out for dinner and meet new people. She feels it is useless to try to meet people. No one really could like her.

Polarized Thinking (or “Black and White” Thinking).
In polarized thinking, things are either “black-or-white.” We have to be perfect or we’re a failure — there is no middle ground. You place people or situations in “either/or” categories, with no shades of gray or allowing for the complexity of most people and situations. If your performance falls short of perfect, you see yourself as a total failure.
( http://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-c ... stortions/ )

Personalization
Attributing personal responsibility, including the resulting praise or blame, for events over which a person has no control.
Example: A mother whose child is struggling in school blames herself entirely for being a bad mother, because she believes that her deficient parenting is responsible. In fact, the real cause may be something else entirely.

Should statements
Doing, or expecting others to do, what they morally should or ought to do irrespective of the particular case the person is faced with. This involves conforming strenuously to ethical categorical imperatives which, by definition, "always apply," or to hypothetical imperatives which apply in that general type of case. Albert Ellis termed this "musturbation". Psychotherapist Michael C. Graham describes this as "expecting the world to be different than it is".
Example: After a performance, a concert pianist believes he or she should not have made so many mistakes. Or, while waiting for an appointment, thinking that the service provider should be on time, and feeling bitter and resentful as a result.

Splitting (All-or-nothing thinking or dichotomous reasoning)
Seeing things in black or white as opposed to shades of gray; thinking in terms of false dilemmas. Splitting involves using terms like "always", "every" or "never" when this is neither true, nor equivalent to the truth.
Example: When an admired person makes a minor mistake, the admiration is turned into contempt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion

[_Amore]

Come on guys - any thoughts and comments at all?

Do you still struggle with any of these? I do.

[_sock puppet]

Hey, Amore,

I think you have assembled and described a fine listing of several LDS distortions. Each is a weakness of human thinking, and in my experience, each was accentuated and to a degree encouraged by the LDS church and culture. Since departing the LDS faith almost 35 years ago, I think each distortion you list has been moderated in me. I think part of the moderation has come through age, experience and wisdom, but as I look at counterparts my same age that have remained in the LDS faith, most yet seem afflicted by these distortions to a degree beyond where I am at with them. So I do also attribute that the lessening of these distortions in myself is in part due to my having distanced myself and no longer being immersed in those LDS teachings and culture.

[_VNephi]

Disqualifying the positive and fallacy of fairness are the biggest ones that still affect me, though sometimes I do tend to do catastrophizing and should statements.

[_Amore]

Hey, Amore,

I think you have assembled and described a fine listing of several LDS distortions. Each is a weakness of human thinking, and in my experience, each was accentuated and to a degree encouraged by the LDS church and culture. Since departing the LDS faith almost 35 years ago, I think each distortion you list has been moderated in me. I think part of the moderation has come through age, experience and wisdom, but as I look at counterparts my same age that have remained in the LDS faith, most yet seem afflicted by these distortions to a degree beyond where I am at with them. So I do also attribute that the lessening of these distortions in myself is in part due to my having distanced myself and no longer being immersed in those LDS teachings and culture.

Thank you SockPuppet,
I think, as you've implied, that much of it comes with common sense - especially after living a bit.
And it's easier to see clearly, when you are not under influence of mind-control, which LDS activity has tended to be.

I wonder if there will ever come a time when cognitive distortions (& basic logical fallacies) are common knowledge - even in the church.
In other words, I wonder if the church leaders will ever try truth wherever it's found - and encourage others to do so also.
If they did, so much would change!
There wouldn't even be the belief in human sacrifice and scapegoating - yet what religious icon or symbol would they use to unify them?
When the sacrament is passed, I try to tell my kids it's a reminder that just as they eat the bread & water and it nourishes them within "the kingdom of God is within you."

[_Amore]

Disqualifying the positive and fallacy of fairness are the biggest ones that still affect me, though sometimes I do tend to do catastrophizing and should statements.

You're not alone. I still struggle with those too - also personalizing.
In the effort to truly overcome depression and anxiety, I've considered life traps ( http://www.lifetraptest.com/ ) in relation to cognitive distortions I've learned.
It's given me a little more direction in living better.

[_sock puppet]

I wonder if there will ever come a time when cognitive distortions (& basic logical fallacies) are common knowledge - even in the church.
In other words, I wonder if the church leaders will ever try truth wherever it's found - and encourage others to do so also.
If they did, so much would change!

That is precisely why I do not think the church leaders will every try truth wherever it's found. The most significant change, for those leaders, would be the loss of their power. I don't think they'll give that up willingly.

Early in the church, JSJr said every church member could receive revelation, but had to stop that before the church had reached the 1st anniversary of its organization. It was organized on 4/6/1830. In September 1830, just five months later, JSJr pronounced a revelation (D&C 28) that bootstrapped for himself (the president of the church) the exclusive right to receive revelations for the church.

But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee [Oliver Cowdery], no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

The LDS scripture introduction to Section 28 provides "Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet to Oliver Cowdery, at Fayette, New York, September 1830."

Just five months into the church's existence, JSJr realized how powerless he would be if anyone, even Oliver Cowdery, could also receive revelations for the church. Truth from other sources is an anathema to the consolidation of power that JSJr and then his successors as presidents of the church have enjoyed.

[_Amore]

That is precisely why I do not think the church leaders will every try truth wherever it's found. The most significant change, for those leaders, would be the loss of their power. I don't think they'll give that up willingly.

I think that's true, but I also think that they only have power because people believe they do.
And most "members" are more interested in being a "member in good standing" than rocking the ship.
I just got kicked off another LDS forum for stating the truth, and family & "friends" have turned against me when I've pointed out less pleasant facts regarding the church.
It comes down to people worshiping the church over God/higher GOoD.

Early in the church, JSJr said every church member could receive revelation, but had to stop that before the church had reached the 1st anniversary of its organization. It was organized on 4/6/1830. In September 1830, just five months later, JSJr pronounced a revelation (D&C 28) that bootstrapped for himself (the president of the church) the exclusive right to receive revelations for the church.

But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee [Oliver Cowdery], no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

The LDS scripture introduction to Section 28 provides "Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet to Oliver Cowdery, at Fayette, New York, September 1830."

Just five months into the church's existence, JSJr realized how powerless he would be if anyone, even Oliver Cowdery, could also receive revelations for the church. Truth from other sources is an anathema to the consolidation of power that JSJr and then his successors as presidents of the church have enjoyed.

Interesting and sad.
I think it shows as Lincoln said, "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
I believe that Joseph Smith did have some kind of spiritual experience (s) but I don't think they were as purely good as history writers would have us believe. And I know from experience, that feeling the spirit is not necessarily a handbook of instructions, but rather a general intuitive signpost saying, this feeling is good. How we interpret the rest, is often subjectively and colored by our own strengths and weaknesses.

Moses was right about "thou shalt not have any other gods before" God.
In giving that commandment, he was basically saying as Jesus did - to NOT worship them, but to look to God only.
That commandment is so significant!
It's basically saying, don't get stuck on anything or anyone - but always look for what is GOoD in each evolving moment. It's the ultimate human challenge, don't you think?

[_jo1952]

Early in the church, JSJr said every church member could receive revelation, but had to stop that before the church had reached the 1st anniversary of its organization. It was organized on 4/6/1830. In September 1830, just five months later, JSJr pronounced a revelation (D&C 28) that bootstrapped for himself (the president of the church) the exclusive right to receive revelations for the church.

But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee [Oliver Cowdery], no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

The LDS scripture introduction to Section 28 provides "Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet to Oliver Cowdery, at Fayette, New York, September 1830."

Just five months into the church's existence, JSJr realized how powerless he would be if anyone, even Oliver Cowdery, could also receive revelations for the church. Truth from other sources is an anathema to the consolidation of power that JSJr and then his successors as presidents of the church have enjoyed.

Interesting and sad.
I think it shows as Lincoln said, "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
I believe that Joseph Smith did have some kind of spiritual experience (s) but I don't think they were as purely good as history writers would have us believe. And I know from experience, that feeling the spirit is not necessarily a handbook of instructions, but rather a general intuitive signpost saying, this feeling is good. How we interpret the rest, is often subjectively and colored by our own strengths and weaknesses.

Moses was right about "thou shalt not have any other gods before" God.
In giving that commandment, he was basically saying as Jesus did - to NOT worship them, but to look to God only.
That commandment is so significant!
It's basically saying, don't get stuck on anything or anyone - but always look for what is GOoD in each evolving moment. It's the ultimate human challenge, don't you think?

I would like to offer my take on this...if I may?

As a True Messenger, Joseph Smith's veil had been pierced. No other man at that time had had this adjustment made. He was the only one who knew the Real Truth about what is really going on here inside of mortality. Oliver Cowdery had not had his veil pierced; no one else had during that time period. When Oliver Cowdery chose to start receiving revelation and teach them, he wasn't basing them on anything which resulted in having his veil pierced. They were made up inside of his own mind. Even if he based them upon things Joseph had told him, he didn't KNOW them like Joseph did (he could only believe them). Once Joseph's veil had been pierced, he KNEW Real Truth---he didn't need to guess or surmise or even exercise faith anymore.

When Joseph taught that each of us can receive revelation, he was telling the truth. He used the word "revelation"...a religious word....in order to attempt to teach something real. That reality is that we are each connected to our own advanced self---and we are always connected; though not in-tuned. This connection is accomplished through our mortal brain---which is really a very, very advanced type of "computer" (if you will). While we are in mortality, we are existing in three different estates simultaneously. Joseph tried to teach about the second and third estates through the Endowment when he portrayed a sleeping Michael as also being Adam and Eve. At the end of the original Endowment, Michael wakes up (that was removed by Brigham Young who had no idea what it meant because he was NOT a True Messenger---his veil had never been pierced), indicating that Michael had still been existing as Michael, even while he participated inside of mortality as Adam and as Eve (which is yet another great mystery revealed!!!). We are able to become in-tuned with our second estate if we pay attention to the "still small voice"---which represents our connection. For the most part, however, our advanced self loses complete control over the third estate self because inside of mortality we can't remember anything that has taken place before we got here (which is the purpose for the veil).

[_Chap]

I would like to offer my take on this...if I may?

As a True Messenger, Joseph Smith's veil had been pierced. No other man at that time had had this adjustment made. He was the only one who knew the Real Truth about what is really going on here inside of mortality. Oliver Cowdery had not had his veil pierced; no one else had during that time period. When Oliver Cowdery chose to start receiving revelation and teach them, he wasn't basing them on anything which resulted in having his veil pierced. They were made up inside of his own mind. Even if he based them upon things Joseph had told him, he didn't KNOW them like Joseph did (he could only believe them). Once Joseph's veil had been pierced, he KNEW Real Truth---he didn't need to guess or surmise or even exercise faith anymore.

I am sure that Joseph Smith would have been delighted to hear you talk in this way. It's more or less the view of himself that he wanted people to believe.

But ... how do we know it is true? Why are you so sure that Smith as well as Cowdery was not simply telling people things that "were made up inside of his own mind"? Do you have some kind of inside information?