Mistake Type:
Subordinating Rationality
Justifying dishonest or exaggerated rhetoric from one’s own group based on the belief that the end justifies the means.
Examples:
“No one knows for sure if the election was stolen, but it’s best if we assume it was.”
“We could be making too big a deal of this issue, but we need the publicity and our posts about it are going viral.”
“Parents beware: woke teachers are trying to recruit students to be homosexual or a different gender.”
About Subordinating Rationality:
The Subordinating Rationality issue type occurs when individuals willingly overlook or justify deceptive or exaggerated claims made by their own political or cultural group. The rationale usually stems from the belief that achieving a particular end—often framed as vital or urgent—justifies the use of any means, even if those means compromise intellectual honesty or integrity. Short-term victories achieved through dishonesty often result in long-term societal harm.
When this issue type comes up, there is typically no room for diplomatic response. Participants who issue this on social media are hardcore and not reachable with constructive arguments. The difficulty in countering this issue type lies in the emotional investment that people often have in the “ends” being discussed. Challenging the means employed to achieve these ends can be perceived as an attack on the ends themselves, making it a delicate subject to address.
This type of rhetoric corrodes the very foundations of rational debate. Once the end justifies the means, any form of dishonesty can be excused, leading to an erosion of shared reality and increasing polarization. For the issuer, it’s a way of assuaging cognitive dissonance between their ethical standards and the actions of their chosen group. For the audience, particularly those who share similar biases, it serves as a way to rationalize away uncomfortable truths about their own side.