Cognitive distortion (pseudoscience): Difference between revisions
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
The concept is used by researchers who are themselves prone to [[Cognitive distortion (psychology)|cognitive distortion]], and rests on the ingrained belief that statements made by minor-attracted people are distorted (no hard evidence is offered), and that these assertions, although subjective and ahistorical, attain the status of "scientific fact". From that point, it is easy to establish that such "distortions" are particularly common among those who express an attraction towards minors, as this fact is already known. The argument has been described as an absurd, self-fulfilling circular. | The concept is used by researchers who are themselves prone to [[Cognitive distortion (psychology)|cognitive distortion]], and rests on the ingrained belief that statements made by minor-attracted people are distorted (no hard evidence is offered), and that these assertions, although subjective and ahistorical, attain the status of "scientific fact". From that point, it is easy to establish that such "distortions" are particularly common among those who express an attraction towards minors, as this fact is already known. The argument has been described as an absurd, self-fulfilling circular. | ||
Agner Fog writes that "The rationale behind cognitive therapy is that the world view of the therapist is believed to be right and when the world view of the patient is different he is said to suffer from cognitive distortion".<ref>Fog, A., “Paraphilias and Therapy,” Nordisk Sexologi, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 236-242, 1992.</ref> Shadd and Mann (2006) cast doubt on whether cognitive distortions lead to offending or reoffending. They also argue that the pathologization of cognitive distortions is inappropriate. In their view, excuses are a normal and healthy aspect of human behavior.<ref>Shadd, M. & Mann, R. (2006). "A fundamental attribution error? Rethinking cognitive distortions," ''Legal and Criminology Psychology'', 11(2), 155-177.</ref> In his book, Howitt is largely critical of the theories, casting doubt upon their applicability in particular.<ref>Howitt, D., (1995). "Paedophiles and Sexual Offences against Children", John Wiley and Sons, Quoted: "There are dangers, of course, in promoting the view that all child abusers lie and distort. The obvious one is the problem of how to deal with an honest offender."</ref> Gannon and Polaschek claim that "the popularity of the cognitive distortion hypothesis is due to factors other than its empirical validity."<ref>Gannon, T. A., & Polaschek, D. L. L. (2006). "Cognitive distortions in child molesters: A re-examination of key theories and research," ''Clinical Psychology Review'', 26(8), 1000-1019.</ref> | Agner Fog writes that "The rationale behind cognitive therapy is that the world view of the therapist is believed to be right and when the world view of the patient is different he is said to suffer from cognitive distortion".<ref>[http://www.helping-people.info/articles/fog_eng.htm Fog, A., “Paraphilias and Therapy,” Nordisk Sexologi, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 236-242, 1992.]</ref> Shadd and Mann (2006) cast doubt on whether cognitive distortions lead to offending or reoffending. They also argue that the pathologization of cognitive distortions is inappropriate. In their view, excuses are a normal and healthy aspect of human behavior.<ref>Shadd, M. & Mann, R. (2006). "A fundamental attribution error? Rethinking cognitive distortions," ''Legal and Criminology Psychology'', 11(2), 155-177.</ref> In his book, Howitt is largely critical of the theories, casting doubt upon their applicability in particular.<ref>Howitt, D., (1995). "Paedophiles and Sexual Offences against Children", John Wiley and Sons, Quoted: "There are dangers, of course, in promoting the view that all child abusers lie and distort. The obvious one is the problem of how to deal with an honest offender."</ref> Gannon and Polaschek claim that "the popularity of the cognitive distortion hypothesis is due to factors other than its empirical validity."<ref>Gannon, T. A., & Polaschek, D. L. L. (2006). "Cognitive distortions in child molesters: A re-examination of key theories and research," ''Clinical Psychology Review'', 26(8), 1000-1019.</ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 19:12, 31 March 2009
The concept of cognitive distortion has been used in victimological pseudoscience to assert that minor attracted individuals are unusually prone to distorted thinking and rationalisations. The motivations behind this usage have been described as political and probably span from a desire to pathologise political dissent and categorise all minor-attracted people as in need of corrective therapy.
The assertion
Studying child sex offenders, a review of qualitative research studies published between 1982 and 2001 concluded that pedophiles use cognitive distortions to meet personal needs, justifying abuse by making excuses, redefining their actions as love and mutuality, and exploiting the power imbalance inherent in all adult-child relationships.[1] Other cognitive distortions are said to include the idea of "children as sexual beings," "uncontrollability of sexuality," and "sexual entitlement-bias."[2]
Refutation
The concept is used by researchers who are themselves prone to cognitive distortion, and rests on the ingrained belief that statements made by minor-attracted people are distorted (no hard evidence is offered), and that these assertions, although subjective and ahistorical, attain the status of "scientific fact". From that point, it is easy to establish that such "distortions" are particularly common among those who express an attraction towards minors, as this fact is already known. The argument has been described as an absurd, self-fulfilling circular.
Agner Fog writes that "The rationale behind cognitive therapy is that the world view of the therapist is believed to be right and when the world view of the patient is different he is said to suffer from cognitive distortion".[3] Shadd and Mann (2006) cast doubt on whether cognitive distortions lead to offending or reoffending. They also argue that the pathologization of cognitive distortions is inappropriate. In their view, excuses are a normal and healthy aspect of human behavior.[4] In his book, Howitt is largely critical of the theories, casting doubt upon their applicability in particular.[5] Gannon and Polaschek claim that "the popularity of the cognitive distortion hypothesis is due to factors other than its empirical validity."[6]
See also
- Debate Guide: Cognitive distortions
- Cognitive distortion (psychology) - Scientific application of the term.
- Alvin Malesky
References
- ↑ Lawson, L. (2003), "Isolation, gratification, justification: offenders' explanations of child molesting", Issues Ment Health Nurs 24, pages 695–705
- ↑ Mihailides, S, Devilly GJ, Ward T,. (2004), "Implicit cognitive distortions and sexual offending" Sex Abuse 16,4, pages 333–50
- ↑ Fog, A., “Paraphilias and Therapy,” Nordisk Sexologi, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 236-242, 1992.
- ↑ Shadd, M. & Mann, R. (2006). "A fundamental attribution error? Rethinking cognitive distortions," Legal and Criminology Psychology, 11(2), 155-177.
- ↑ Howitt, D., (1995). "Paedophiles and Sexual Offences against Children", John Wiley and Sons, Quoted: "There are dangers, of course, in promoting the view that all child abusers lie and distort. The obvious one is the problem of how to deal with an honest offender."
- ↑ Gannon, T. A., & Polaschek, D. L. L. (2006). "Cognitive distortions in child molesters: A re-examination of key theories and research," Clinical Psychology Review, 26(8), 1000-1019.