9/11 Truth and Psychology

I've often thought this article, "Psychology Experts Speak Out: 'Why is the 9/11 Evidence Difficult for Some to Accept" really goes to the heart of why so many otherwise intelligent people continue to maintain the official explanation for 9-11.

To my way of thinking, just the simple reality of Tower VII collapsing in free fall is sufficient evidence that the official explanation for 9-11 (Muslim fanatics armed with boxcutters launched a surprise attach) is pure fantasy.  Since a building like this can only collapse from internal demolition, which is in fact a quite sophisticated process that requires much prior preparation.  The boxcutter theory, in fact, given this evidence, is quite laughable.

However, many people who are well aware of the Tower 7 collapse continue to maintain the validity of the official version.  (Including, and maybe I'll remark on this more another day, investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill.)  An excerpt from the article states;

9/11 Truth challenges some of our most fundamental beliefs about our government and about our country. When beliefs are challenged or when two beliefs are inconsistent, cognitive dissonance is created. 9/11 Truth challenges [our] beliefs that our country protects and keeps us safe and that America is the ‘good guy.’ When this happens, fear and anxiety are created. In response, our psychological defenses kick in [to] protect us from these emotions. Denial, which is probably the most primitive psychological defense, is the one most likely to kick in when our beliefs are challenged.

I guess that what I'm saying is that I think a lot of people have come to the conclusions they have about 9/11 not based on hard evidence, but rather on their world view, the paradigm they have established (in their minds) for who the US is and it's relation to the rest of the world.  

No comments

Post a Comment