# data[].attributes.body
Syed N. Ahmed

ID: 100766016

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 5: Red Flag: The Silent Threat: Suppression by Authorities 

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 5: Red Flag: The Silent Threat: Suppression by Authorities 

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Suppression by authorities refers to the act of a governing body or power restricting or controlling information, speech, or public discourse to maintain control or avoid dissent. This can include censorship, media control, and other forms of information suppression.

Connection: Suppression by authorities encompasses the deliberate restriction or manipulation of information, speech, or public discourse by governing bodies to assert control and mitigate dissent.

The prevalence of suppression by authorities spans diverse political and cultural landscapes, highlighting the potential for bias inherent in power structures. Recognizing and challenging this bias is essential to preserving democratic freedoms and human rights.

Assessing the legitimacy of claims regarding suppression by authorities requires scrutiny of the sources presenting such information. Individuals must consider the credibility and motivations of these sources to discern the accuracy and reliability of the claims made.

While instances of suppression by authorities may be widely documented, a critical evaluation of the evidence presented is necessary to understand the extent and implications of such actions. Contextual analysis helps to distinguish genuine instances of suppression from misinterpretations or exaggerations.

Suppression by authorities poses a global challenge to democratic principles and human rights, necessitating vigilance and proactive measures to safeguard freedom of expression and access to information. By recognizing bias, evaluating sources and evidence, society can uphold fundamental rights and resist the erosion of democratic values.

Object: The objective in recognizing and addressing suppression by authorities is to safeguard the fundamental rights of freedom of expression and access to information. It is crucial for the health of a society to have the ability to question, criticize, and hold those in power accountable.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Censorship generally involves shutting people up, rather than refuting their ideas. This usually takes either of two main forms:

1. Deplatforming people, i.e., not permitting them to use a platform to express themselves.

2. Some sort of threat of (or actual) punishment for expressing those ideas.

I will be exploring these issues in this three-part series: Censorship by Authorities (this post); Increasing Social Norms of Censorship; and Self-Censorship
What Is Censorship?
Censorship is, according to the Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science, the prohibition of the production, distribution, circulation, or display of a work by a governing authority on grounds that it contains objectionable or dangerous material. To get more specific, let's look at different types of censorship.
Government Censorship
Free speech is, in the grand sweep of history, a mostly recent, and constantly evolving concept.

The ancient Greeks did have a version of free speech, but it was mostly downhill thereafter. On every continent, in just about every culture, far more common than free speech were broadsweeping sedition and libel laws, throwing Christians to lions, witch-burnings, book burnings, blasphemy and heresy laws, Inquisitions and forced conversions. These laws and practices were often "justified" by claims to be doing God's will, keeping society morally pure, preventing filth and corruption, maintaining order, ensuring "respect" for authorities, and/or "protecting" particular social, political, ethnic, cultural, or religious groups.

Because of the First Amendment protections of speech, press, and religion, one might think that the U.S. is a bastion of free speech with only extremely limited government censorship. The truth is more complex. The First Amendment does offer some of the strongest legal protections for speech on the planet. And yet, it is often cultural norms, rather than laws, that offer the strongest protection. For example, before the Civil War, in some Southern states, you could be jailed for publicly calling for emancipation. As late as the 1960s, you could be jailed for protesting against Jim Crow segregation laws in some of those same states. And just this month, the Kentucky state legislature passed a law declaring it a crime to insult the police. The three P's - profanity, pornography, and protest - have long been flashpoints for battles over free speech and censorship. In 2021, countries with some of the strongest laws on the books protecting free speech include N. Korea, Russia, and Turkey.

You are wrong if the only thing you think of, when you think about censorship, is government prohibitions. Most censorship comes from elsewhere. In the U.S., if it is not government censorship, it is not protected by The First Amendment.
Censorship by an Authority Other Than the Government
The definition of censorship provided earlier refers to suppression by a "governing authority." This is an interesting term. It includes, but is not equivalent to "government." There are "governing authorities" everywhere. Your boss is a "governing authority" unless your speech is contractually protected.

Academic journals' editorial boards are the governing authorities over what gets published there. Retraction by outrage mob, of duly published academic articles that have passed peer review, is one manifestation of censorship. (See examples here.) Although outrage mobs usually initiate the process (via pile-ons on Twitter, open letters or petitions, etc.), it is ultimately the editors who make the decision to retract or pressure the authors to "voluntarily" retract. Authorities.

Similarly, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, GoFundme, Youtube, etc., are the "governing authorities" over what appears on their platforms. The 2021 purge of Qanon and other extreme right-wing accounts from social media constitutes another example of censorship.

Something can be not only available somewhere and still have been censored, it can actually be popular. For example, if you get banned on Twitter, you might still get your ideas out via Facebook, Reddit, or Youtube. In fact, you might become so popular on Youtube or Patreon that you become rich and famous. You still have been censored (by Twitter). This is perfectly legal and does not violate the First Amendment, which only protects people from government interference in free expression.

Depending on the situation, some people might even think they are right for censoring, especially if those censored are posting hateful, racist, or vile content, inciting violent insurrection, or spreading misinformation about public health, election security, or international antisemitic conspiracies. Nonetheless, if you think it is justified, then you think censorship, in this case, is justified. This is important because it contributes to a culture of censorship and self-censorship, raising the question, which is more harmful: To censor dangerous or hateful speech or to create a culture of censorship?
Academic Freedom
Academic freedom is a core constituent of free expression, something given Constitutional protection by the Supreme Court:
"Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned. That freedom is therefore a special concern of the First Amendment, which does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom."
From the American Association of University Professors' 1940 statement, which most major colleges and universities claim to endorse:

Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties...

Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject

From the University of Chicago Statement on Freedom of Expression:

Education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think.

It is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.

The University's fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.

Rutgers, my home institution, has some very powerful contractual language regarding academic freedom:
Since the very nature of a university and its value to society depend upon the free pursuit and dissemination of knowledge...all members of the faculty are expected, whenever and wherever they engage in teaching, research, service, professional practice, or clinical practice, as well as in their research and professional publication, freely to discuss subjects with which they are competent to deal.

Professors'...primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it.

Of course, these are statements of principle; the extent to which colleges and universities live up to their own self-declared principles is another matter entirely.
Assaults on Free Expression and Academic Freedom
How are universities doing? Go here for a long list of professors subject to sanctions up to and including being fired for exercising their academic freedom on everything from identity politics to biology to colonialism. The problem here is the authorities themselves. If university administrations are not willing to protect their faculty from outrage mobs, high-minded endorsements of academic freedom are meaningless. Universities typically have vastly more resources than do fired faculty, making it exceedingly difficult for those faculty to defend their rights, say, by suing, which requires lawyers, who can be quite expensive.

And this is the tip of the iceberg. This major report, which I will go into in some depth in my next post, provides results from scores of studies all converging on the conclusion that academic freedom is in danger.

Then there are "cancellation attacks," which occur both inside and outside of the academy, and about which I have written two posts ( here and here). Cancellation attacks involve mobs denouncing people, publicly humiliating them, and attempting to punish them for legitimate ideas or political positions, or for minor mistakes and missteps. Because those engaging in such attacks so often blatantly lie and flagrantly disregard facts, and engage in gaslighting, their victims often do not understand what is happening till it is too late. People have been attacked and/or fired for arguing that there were some benefits to colonialism, for being anti-racist but not anti-racist enough, and for tweeting a sociology article showing that peaceful protests are more persuasive than violent ones. ( Go here for the list that includes these and many others).

Universities once were bastions of free thought, where even outrageous ideas could be proposed, attacked, and defended. That era seems to be ending, raising the question: If free thought and expression will not be cultivated and supported in the academy, where will it bloom? Because, mark my words: If it is driven out of the academy, it will take root elsewhere. And it will probably take some of the best minds with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Part 1: Censorship by government and lesser authorities.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 1 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Illusion of Profundity: Navigating Pseudo-Scientific Jargon

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 1 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Illusion of Profundity: Navigating Pseudo-Scientific Jargon

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Pseudo-scientific language often masquerades as legitimate science, using complex terminology and jargon to create the illusion of credibility. However, upon closer examination, these terms prove to be devoid of substantive meaning or a scientific basis.

Connection: The entanglement with pseudo-scientific language often begins when we define the claim; a statement or theory is presented with an air of scientific authority. As we delve deeper, we recognize bias in the use of complex jargon that may be intended to obscure rather than clarify. Vigilance requires us to evaluate the source of the information, discerning between genuine scholarly work and that which merely dresses itself in the trappings of academia. The evidence must be critically examined, with an eye for distinguishing empirical data from anecdotal or non-scientific assertions. A summary conclusion is then drawn, not just on the validity of the claim but also on the integrity of its presentation, ensuring that it contributes meaningfully to the discourse and withstands the scrutiny of authentic scientific methodology.

Object: The objective in identifying and challenging pseudo-scientific language is to promote clarity, critical thinking, and genuine scientific literacy. By doing so, we can foster an environment where true scientific discourse can thrive, unobstructed by the noise of meaningless jargon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1.7 Pseudoscience and Other Misuses of Science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Created by: CK-12/Adapted by: Christine Miller Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice that is presented as scientific but does not adhere to the standards and methods of science. True science is based on repeated evidence-gathering and testing of falsifiable hypotheses. Pseudoscience does not adhere to these criteria.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 6: Red Flag: The Mirage of Mystical Energy: Recognizing Red Flags

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 6: Red Flag: The Mirage of Mystical Energy: Recognizing Red Flags

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Mystical energy refers to the concept of an unseen force or power that is often attributed to spiritual, supernatural, or metaphysical sources. It is frequently described in vague terms and is said to influence or control aspects of the physical world or human well-being.

Connection: The entanglement with pseudo-scientific language often begins when we define the claim; a statement or theory is presented with an air of scientific authority. As we delve deeper, we recognize bias in the use of complex jargon that may be intended to obscure rather than clarify. Vigilance requires us to evaluate the source of the information, discerning between genuine scholarly work and that which merely dresses itself in the trappings of academia. The evidence must be critically examined, with an eye for distinguishing empirical data from anecdotal or non-scientific assertions. A summary conclusion is then drawn, not just on the validity of the claim but also on the integrity of its presentation, ensuring that it contributes meaningfully to the discourse and withstands the scrutiny of authentic scientific methodology.

.

Object: The objective of identifying mystical energy as a red flag is to encourage critical thinking and scientific skepticism. It serves as a caution against accepting unverified claims that lack empirical evidence and may lead to reliance on ineffective or harmful practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A local Reiki practitioner claims on her website that her clients receive “spiritual universal energy” during one of her therapeutic sessions. Indeed, one of the published testimonials is from a client who claims the practitioner could “connect to [her] energy almost instantaneously” and she could feel her moving from chakra to chakra, “connecting all the pieces.” In order to explain why I dismiss these claims about “spiritual universal energy”, I feel like I have to properly define energy, but achieving that turns out to be a lot like trying to capture water in your fist. It’s very slippery and you end up making a mess. Physicists are the accountants of the natural world I learned about energy in school but, to write this piece, I decided to seek out textbooks, videos and articles that had wrestled with clearly explaining what actual energy is from a scientific point of view. Many of the definitions felt like cop-outs, like the fact that it’s the ability to do work, the latter being the movement of an object against an opposing force. That is accurate but it feels like sleight-of-hand: what is this “ability” to do work? What does it look like? What does it even smell like? I doubt there exists a truly satisfying definition of energy out there. If there is, I haven’t found it. The best encapsulation of it I heard came from the Science Asylum YouTube channel. Energy is a weird, abstract property of the universe. It’s not a flash of light, it’s not a mystical heat, it’s not a series of tiny balls filled with universe juice. It’s a number. And in a closed system, like our universe, that number can be tracked by an accountant. Imagine having a million dollars in the bank (ain’t that nice?) and never receiving a single cent more or spending any of it. But you can put some of it in a special account called “kinetic energy” (that’s tied to movement) and the rest in a different account called “potential energy” (tied to the possibility of movement). And you can keep moving the money around between these two accounts but it will always add up to a million. Energy is like that. In a closed system, energy is never created, never destroyed, only transferred or transformed. The Rube Goldberg machine of our body Some forms of energy are easier to visualize than others. The energy of a falling apple can be imagined as coming from the gravity field around our planet. The apple falls because the Earth’s gravity draws it toward the ground. But what about the food energy of that apple? Where in the fruit is the sustaining energy our body needs? An apple contains molecules known as sugars. In our digestive tract, these sugars are broken down into a very simple one, glucose. We all know glucose holds energy we can use, but where in this ring of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen is it? Glucose gets broken down into smaller molecules and, in the process (and to simplify the fascinating biochemistry quite a bit), two molecules of ATP emerge. These ATP molecules are key. They each have a tail of three identical groups called phosphates. That last phosphate can be broken off and sent to bind to a different molecule. That, right there, is energy. It’s not the phosphate itself, but its transfer from one molecule to another, allowing for a cascade of chemical events to take place which grant us the ability to move and to stay alive. Can mystical energies really be felt? Actual energy, like gravity and the energy contained in food, is studied by scientists and its properties can be discovered, leading to predictions. But to come back to the “spiritual universal energy” of our local Reiki practitioner, the word “energy” can be mangled and appropriated. Many alternative medicine practitioners believe in a form of energy—alternatively called qi, prana or universal energy—that our body has and that they can manipulate, with no evidence of its existence. That doesn’t stop them from claiming they can feel it, unblock it, or balance it. But there is no evidence for the existence of this form of energy, and actual evidence that its believers can’t even feel it. A nine-year-old girl, Emily Rosa, working with her parents and Dr. Stephen Barrett (who runs Quackwatch), designed an experiment in the late 1990s to test whether practitioners of therapeutic touch could actually detect the mysterious energy field they claimed surrounded the human body and which they said they could “repattern”. Fine, Rosa said: if that’s the case, you should be able to do it blind. So the practitioners were each sat in front of a large screen with cutouts at the bottom so they could slide their hands underneath it. Rosa hovered her hand over either the left or right hand of the practitioner. Said practitioner had to feel the little girl’s energy and say over which of their hand was Rosa’s own hand. This was repeated several times with a total of 21 practitioners, and the end result was that they might as well have flipped a coin. They simply could not feel Rosa’s energy over their open hand, despite their claims. There is real energy all around us, potential and kinetic energy scientists can measure, harness, and manipulate. But because of energy’s slippery nature—it’s a mathematical property of stuff, not a glowing orb—and because of our intuitions and wishful thinking, it’s a concept that lends itself well to pseudoscience. Trying to manipulate this non-scientific, mystical energy turns out to be, well, a waste of energy. Take-home message: - Energy cannot be easily defined, as it is not a thing so much as a number, a property that objects have in our universe - Because of the abstract nature of energy, it has been used by many believers in alternative therapies but we should be skeptical of claims of the existence of “non-scientific” energies @CrackedScience Want to comment on this article? Visit our Facebook Page!

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 2 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Art of Ambiguity: Deliberate Mystery in Narratives

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 2 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Art of Ambiguity: Deliberate Mystery in Narratives

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Deliberate mystery involves the intentional withholding of information or the use of ambiguous language to create a sense of intrigue or uncertainty. This technique is often employed in storytelling to engage the audience and drive the narrative forward.

Define Claim: Pseudo-scientific language presents itself as scientifically valid through the intricate complexity of its terminology and jargon. However, it lacks the substance and empirical basis necessary to support its claims.

Recognize Bias: The infiltration of pseudo-scientific language across academic, marketing, and policy domains obscures underlying biases, manipulating perceptions and shaping beliefs without transparent disclosure.

Evaluate Source: Discerning the legitimacy of sources becomes paramount amidst the pervasive spread of pseudo-scientific language. Individuals must scrutinize the credibility and expertise of those disseminating such language to ascertain the reliability of the information presented.

Evaluate Evidence: Within the labyrinth of pseudo-scientific discourse, evidence may be scarce or selectively curated to uphold predetermined narratives. Critical analysis of the evidence provided is essential to distinguish genuine scientific inquiry from deceptive rhetoric.

Summary Conclusion: Unmasking and challenging pseudo-scientific language is imperative for fostering clarity, critical thinking, and genuine scientific literacy. By cultivating a discerning mindset and scrutinizing sources and evidence, we can navigate through the fog of meaningless verbosity towards a landscape of authentic scientific inquiry and understanding.

Object: The objective behind deliberately creating mystery is to stimulate curiosity and maintain interest. It challenges the audience to think critically and piece together the information presented to uncover the underlying truth or message.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The unreliable narrator is a powerful and widely used narrative technique that can add depth, intrigue, and complexity to your story. In this article, we will explore the concept of the unreliable narrator, discuss how to use it effectively in your writing, and provide captivating examples from literature to help you understand the technique's full potential. With this knowledge in hand, you will be better equipped to create engaging stories that leave your readers guessing until the very end.

What is an Unreliable Narrator?

An unreliable narrator is a character who tells the story but cannot be trusted to provide an accurate or complete account of events. This can result from a variety of factors, such as personal bias, mental instability, deliberate deception, or simply a lack of knowledge. By using an unreliable narrator, writers can introduce twists, misdirection, and suspense, as well as provoke readers to question the nature of truth and reality.

Types of Unreliable Narrators

The Deliberately Deceptive Narrator

This type of narrator intentionally lies or manipulates information to serve their own purposes or to mislead readers. For example, in Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn, Amy Dunne fabricates her own disappearance, leaving behind a diary that points to her husband as prime suspect. Throughout the story, readers are deceived by Amy's lies, making for a thrilling and unexpected reading experience.

This type of unreliable narrator could also be lying to protect someone they feel respect or responsibility for. This is seen in stories like The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. The narrator, Nick Carraway, tells us about Jay Gatsby and his longing to reunite with his love, Daisy Buchanan, even though she is married. Nick's closeness to the situation and respectful admiration of Jay Gatsby leaves us to question the truth of his account.

The Mentally Unstable Narrator

Mental illness or instability can cause a narrator to perceive events inaccurately or to convey a distorted version of reality. In The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger, the protagonist, Holden Caulfield, suffers from mental instability, which colors his perception of the world and other characters. As a result, readers must sift through Holden's subjective account to determine what is true and what is a product of his troubled mind.

The Naïve or Innocent Narrator

A narrator who is inexperienced, naïve, or innocent may misunderstand or misinterpret events, leading to an incomplete or inaccurate account. In To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, the young narrator, Scout Finch, does not fully understand the racial prejudice and social injustice that permeate her small Southern town. Her limited perspective forces readers to piece together the truth from her observations and interactions.

How to Use the Unreliable Narrator in Your Writing

One of the most powerful effects of the unreliable narrator is its ability to subvert reader expectations. By presenting a version of events that is later revealed to be false or incomplete, you can create surprising twists and turns that keep your audience engaged and guessing. This can be done in a variety of ways:

Subverting CONVENTIONS and OBLIGATORY MOMENTS. Understanding how to use and subvert the CONVENTIONS and OBLIGATORY MOMENTS of your genre can help you create mystery and uncertainty within your narrative.

Planning out your novel. To build suspense and intrigue, incorporate subtle clues throughout your story that hint at the narrator's unreliability. This can include inconsistencies in their account, other characters questioning their credibility, or moments of self-doubt. It is important to plan the location of each of these clues to create a balance between reality and falsehoods. For more help planning out your novel, check out the Story Grid's NARRATIVE PATH.

Establish an authentic voice and journey for your narrator. While it's important to establish your narrator's unreliability, it's equally crucial to make them a relatable and engaging character. Readers should feel emotionally invested in the narrator's journey, even if they doubt the veracity of their account. One of the most effective ways to create an engaging unreliable narrator is to give them a unique and compelling voice. This helps to create a sense of authenticity and enables readers to connect with the character. This delicate balance can be achieved by providing moments of vulnerability, sincerity, or insight that humanize your narrator.

By using an unreliable narrator, you invite readers to become active participants in the story, challenging them to decipher the truth from the character's biased or distorted account. This can create a more immersive and interactive reading experience, as readers must piece together the puzzle and draw their own conclusions.

Examples of Unreliable Narrators in Literature

1. Humbert Humbert in Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov: As the narrator of this controversial novel, Humbert Humbert is a manipulative and self-serving character who justifies his immoral actions through eloquent language and charm. Readers must navigate his biased account to determine the true nature of his relationship with the young Lolita.

2. Patrick Bateman in American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis: The protagonist and narrator of this chilling novel, Patrick Bateman, is an affluent Wall Street executive with a hidden life as a serial killer. His narration is filled with gruesome descriptions of violence, yet his reliability is called into question as the line between reality and his delusions becomes increasingly blurred.

3. Chief Bromden in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey: Chief Bromden, a patient in a mental institution, narrates the story of Randle McMurphy's rebellion against the oppressive Nurse Ratched. Chief Bromden's perspective is shaped by his paranoid delusions and hallucinations, forcing readers to question the accuracy of his account and the true nature of the institution.

4. Nelly Dean in Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë: As the primary narrator of this classic novel, Nelly Dean, a servant in the Earnshaw and Linton households, recounts the tumultuous love story of Heathcliff and Catherine. However, Nelly's personal involvement in the events and her own biases and opinions shape her account, leaving readers to question the extent of her reliability.

Conclusion

The unreliable narrator is a versatile and compelling narrative technique that can enhance your storytelling by adding depth, intrigue, and complexity. By understanding the different types of unreliable narrators, learning how to use this technique effectively in your writing, and drawing inspiration from the examples provided, you can create engaging stories that challenge your readers to question the nature of truth and reality. As a writer, the unreliable narrator offers endless opportunities to explore the intricacies of human perception, memory, and emotion, making it a powerful tool for character development and narrative innovation.

Share this Article:

🟢 Twitter - 🔵 Facebook - 🔴 Pinterest

Sign up below and we'll immediately send you a coupon code to get any Story Grid title - print, ebook or audiobook - for free.

(Browse all the Story Grid titles)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Unreliable Narrator: A Comprehensive Guide for Writers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The unreliable narrator is a powerful and widely used narrative technique that can add depth, intrigue, and complexity to your story. In this article, we

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 10: Reasons for Belief: The Essence of Simplicity: Unraveling Complexity

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 10: Reasons for Belief: The Essence of Simplicity: Unraveling Complexity

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Simplicity refers to the quality of being easy to understand or not complicated. It embodies clarity, purity, and the absence of unnecessary components, often resulting in greater efficiency and focus.

Connection: The principle of simplicity in design resonates deeply when we define the claim of what simplicity means in a given context—be it architecture, art, or user interfaces. It requires us to recognize bias towards complexity and question our inclination to add rather than subtract. We evaluate the source of our design principles, often finding inspiration in nature, historical precedents, or the minimalist movement. The evidence of simplicity’s effectiveness is evaluated through user experience studies and aesthetic appraisal. Finally, a summary conclusion is drawn that simplicity, when executed thoughtfully, leads to designs that are not only visually pleasing but also functionally superior, providing clear, intuitive experiences for the end-user.

Object: The objective of valuing simplicity is to foster an appreciation for the minimal, the essential, and the straightforward. It serves as a foundation for belief in the power of reduction and the beauty of clear, uncluttered concepts and solutions.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 7: Reg Flag: The Misleading Link: Confusion of Correlation with Causation.

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 7: Reg Flag: The Misleading Link: Confusion of Correlation with Causation.

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: The confusion of correlation with causation occurs when two variables that appear to be related are incorrectly assumed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. Just because two trends seem to follow each other, it does not mean that one causes the other.

Connection: The conflation of correlation with causation is a pervasive issue that necessitates a disciplined approach to data analysis. It starts with defining the claim—clearly stating the relationship under scrutiny. This is followed by recognizing bias, both in the data and the interpretation, which could skew the understanding of the relationship. Next, we evaluate the source of the data, ensuring it is credible and relevant. Then, the evidence is critically assessed, looking for statistical significance and other factors that support a causal link. Finally, a summary conclusion is drawn, which either confirms or refutes the initial claim based on the strength of the evidence, while always remaining open to further investigation and analysis. This process is essential for distinguishing between mere coincidences and true cause-and-effect relationships.

Object: The objective in highlighting this confusion is to promote critical analysis of data and encourage the search for true causal relationships, rather than accepting correlations at face value. Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurate research and informed decision-making.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Real examples of Correlation confused with Causation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I’m looking for specific, real cases in which a causal relationship was inappropriately inferred from evidence of a correlation. Specifically, I’m interested in examples that meet the following

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 3 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Power of Pathos: Emotional Appeals in Persuasion

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 3 Pseudoscience Watchlist: The Power of Pathos: Emotional Appeals in Persuasion

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Emotional appeals, or pathos, are a rhetorical strategy used to engage an audience’s emotions to gain their support or agreement. This approach can evoke a wide range of feelings, from empathy and solidarity to fear and anger, to strengthen the persuader’s message.

Connection:

Define Claim: Emotional appeals, or pathos, strategically leverage audience emotions to garner support or agreement, bypassing rational analysis in favor of a direct connection to values, desires, or fears.

Recognize Bias: Within advertising, political discourse, and public speaking, the pervasive use of emotional appeals may conceal underlying biases, manipulating audience perceptions and eliciting emotional responses to sway opinions.

Evaluate Source: Discerning the legitimacy of emotional appeals necessitates scrutiny of the source's credibility and intent. Individuals must consider the motivations behind the use of emotional rhetoric and assess whether it aligns with genuine discourse or serves ulterior agendas.

Evaluate Evidence: While emotional appeals can evoke powerful responses, their effectiveness does not inherently validate the arguments presented. Critical evaluation of supporting evidence is essential to determine the validity and reliability of the message conveyed.

Summary Conclusion: Emotional appeals serve as a potent tool in advertising, politics, and public speaking, fostering connections with audiences by tapping into their emotions. However, vigilance is required to recognize and mitigate biases, evaluate sources, and scrutinize evidence to ensure that emotional rhetoric does not obscure the pursuit of truth and rational discourse.

Object: The objective of using emotional appeals is to create a strong connection with the audience, making the message more memorable and impactful. It’s a way to humanize arguments and make abstract concepts more relatable and compelling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Association for Psychological Science - APS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We intuitively use more emotional language to enhance our powers of persuasion, according to research published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science. The research shows that people tend toward appeals that aren't simply more positive or negative but are infused with emotionality, even when they're trying to sway an audience that may not be receptive to such language.

"Beyond simply becoming more positive or negative, people spontaneously shift toward using more emotional language when trying to persuade," says researcher Matthew D. Rocklage of The Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.

We might imagine that people would use very positive words such as "excellent" or "outstanding" to bring others around to their point of view, but the findings showed that people specifically used terms that convey a greater degree of emotion, such as "exciting" and "thrilling."

Understanding the components that make for a persuasive message is a critical focus of fields ranging from advertising to politics and even public health. Rocklage and colleagues wanted to look at the question from a different angle, exploring how we communicate with others when we are the ones trying to persuade.

"It's possible that to be seen as rational and reasonable, people might remove emotion from their language when attempting to persuade," says Rocklage. Drawing from attitudes theory and social-function theories of emotion, however, Rocklage and colleagues Derek D. Rucker and Loran F. Nordgren hypothesized that people would go the other way, tapping into emotional language as a means of social influence.

In one online study, the researchers showed 1,285 participants a photo and some relevant details for a particular product available from Amazon.com. They asked some participants to write a five-star review that would persuade readers to purchase that product, while they asked others to write a five-star review that simply described the product's positive features.

Using an established tool for quantitative linguistic analysis, the Evaluative Lexicon, the researchers then quantified how emotional, positive or negative, and extreme the reviews were.

Although the reviews were equally positive in their language, the data showed that reviewers used more emotional language when they were trying to persuade readers to buy a product compared with when they were writing a five-star review without intending to persuade. Participants' persuasive reviews also had more emotional language compared with actual five-star reviews for the same products published on Amazon.com.

Importantly, the shift toward more emotional language appeared to be automatic rather than deliberative. Participants still used more emotional descriptors in persuasive reviews when they were simultaneously trying to remember an 8-digit number, a competing task that made strategizing very difficult.

The tendency to use more emotional language emerged even when participants were attempting to persuade a group of "rational" thinkers.

"Past research indicates that emotional appeals can backfire when an audience prefers unemotional appeals," says Rocklage. "Our findings indicate that there is a strong enough connection between persuasion and emotion in people's minds that they continue to use emotion even in the face of an audience where that approach can backfire."

Indeed, additional evidence indicated a connection between emotion and persuasion in memory. The researchers found that the more emotional a word was, the more likely participants were to associate it with persuasion and the quicker they did so.

An interesting avenue for future research, says Rocklage, is to investigate whether the association transfers across various contexts.

"For instance, would people use less emotion if they were in a boardroom meeting or if they were writing a formal letter of recommendation?" he wonders.

The design and analysis plans for Experiment 4 were preregistered at the Open Science Framework. The complete Open Practices Disclosure for this article is available online. This article has received the badge for Preregistration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
People Use Emotion to Persuade, Even When It Could Backfire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People tend toward appeals that aren't simply more positive or negative but are infused with emotionality, even when they're trying to sway an audience that may not be receptive to such language.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 11: Reasons for Belief: The Enigma of the Unexplained: Navigating the Unknown

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 11: Reasons for Belief: The Enigma of the Unexplained: Navigating the Unknown

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: “Unexplained” refers to phenomena or occurrences that lack a clear, logical, or scientific explanation. These can range from medical symptoms to mysterious events that challenge our understanding of the world.

Connection: The allure of the unexplained lies in its ability to provoke a deep sense of wonder and curiosity. When faced with phenomena that defy easy explanation, our natural response is to define the claim by describing the occurrence as precisely as possible. This often leads to a process where we recognize any potential biases that might color our interpretation of the events. We then evaluate the sources of our information, questioning their reliability and seeking corroboration from independent observers. The next step is to evaluate the evidence available, which may include eyewitness accounts, physical traces, or scientific data. Finally, we draw a summary conclusion that encapsulates our current understanding of the phenomenon, while remaining open to new information and interpretations. This iterative process reflects the dynamic nature of knowledge and the ongoing quest to understand the mysterious aspects of our world.

Object: The objective in exploring the unexplained is to push the boundaries of what we know and understand. It encourages scientific inquiry and skepticism, reminding us that not all is known and much is left to discover.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Escalating care for patients with red flag symptoms

Red flag symptoms and vital signs are suggestive of severe disease. Patients with red flag symptoms should be immediately assessed. They might require urgent care in a hospital emergency department or by ambulance services.

Red flag symptoms include: 12

Remember that the patient might have a different illness that is not COVID-19 related. Your assessment should include the consideration of other causes of these symptoms.

Remember if a patient speaks a language other than English and requires an interpreter, provide an explanation about this new situation using an interpreter to reduce the patient's anxiety and maximise their ability to comprehend the situation and management plan. Ensure the patient's cultural needs are met and record specific language and cultural needs in any referral letters.

1. World Health Organization. A clinical case definition of post COVID-19 condition by a Delphi consensus, 6 October 2021. Geneva: WHO, 2021 int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Post_COVID-19_condition-Clinical_ case_definition-2021.1 [Accessed 24 November 2021].

2. Greenhalgh T, Knight M, A'Court M, Buxton M, Husain L. Management of post- acute covid-19 in primary care. BMJ 2020;370:m3026.

3. Nalbandian A, Sehgal K, Gupta K, et al. Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome. Nat Med 2021;27(4):601-15.

4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. COVID-19 rapid guideline: Managing the long-term effects of COVID-19. UK: NICE, 2021 [Accessed 6 December 2021].

5. Pavli A, Theodoridou M, Maltezou H. Post-COVID syndrome: Incidence, clinical spectrum, and challenges for primary healthcare professionals. Arch Med Res 2021;52(6): 575-81.

6. Office for National Statistics. Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK: 1 April 2021. UK: Office for National Statistics, 2021 omsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/1april2021#measuring-the-data [Accessed 24 November 2021].

7. Liu B, Jayasundara D, Pye V, et al. Whole of population-based cohort study of recovery time from COVID-19 in New South Wales Australia. Lancet Reg Health West Pac 2021;12:100193.

8. Antonelli M, Penfold R, Merino J, Sudre C. Risk factors and disease profile of post- vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app: A prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study. Lancet Infect Dis 2021;S1473-3099(21)00460-6.

9. Barker-Davies R, O'Sullivan O, Senaratne K, et al. The Stanford Hall consensus statement for post-COVID 19 rehabilitation. Br J Sports Med 2020;54(16):949-59.

10. Venkatesan P. NICE guideline on long COVID. Lancet Respir Med 2021;9(2):129.

11. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. The first year of COVID-19 in Australia: Direct and indirect health effects. Canberra: Australian Government, 2021 phe-287.pdf [Accessed 23 November 2021].

12. National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. Care of people with post-COVID-19 (version 4.0). Melbourne: National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce, 2022 [Accessed 5 May 2022].

13. British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine. Rehabilitation in the wake of COVID-19 - A phoenix from the ashes. UK: BSRM, 2020 downloads/covid-19bsrmissue1-published-27-4-2020.pdf [Accessed 23 November 2021].

14. Selvaraj V, Dapaah-Afriyie K. Lung cavitation due to COVID 19 pneumonia. BMJ Case Rep 2020;13(7):e237245.

15. Carfi A, Bernabei R, Landi R, Gemelli Against COVID-19 Post-Acute Study Group. Persistent symptoms in patients after acute COVID-19. JAMA 2020;324(6):603-05.

16. Spruit MA, Holland AE, Singh SJ, et al. COVID-19: interim guidance on rehabilitation in the hospital and post-hospital phase from a European Respiratory Society and American Thoracic Society-coordinated international task force. Eur Respir J 2020;56(6):2002197.

17. Rroku A, Kottwitz J, Heidecker B. Update on myocarditis - what we know so far and where we may be heading. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2020 (ahead of print).

18. Firth J, Marx W, Dash S, et al. The effects of dietary improvement on symptoms of depression and anxiety: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Psychosom Med 2019;81(3):265-80.

19. National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. Management of adults with mild-COVID-19 (version 42). Melbourne: National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce, 2022 [Accessed 5 May 2022].

20. National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. Australian guidelines for clinical care of people with COVID-19 (version 56.1) - Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Melbourne: National COVID-19 Clinical evidence Taskforce, 2022 [Accessed 5 May 2022].

21. American Society of Haematology. COVID-19 and VTE/anticoagulation: Frequently asked questions (version 12). Washington: American Society of Haematology, 2021 [Accessed 6 December 2021].

22. Herrera JE, Niehaus WN, Whiteson J, et al. Multidisciplinary collaborative consensus guidance statement on the assessment and treatment of fatigue in postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) patients. PM R 2021;13(9):1027-43.

23. Thurber K, Barrett E, Agostino J, et al. Risk of severe illness from COVID-19 among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults: The construct of 'vulnerable populations' obscures the root causes of health inequities. Aust N Z J Public Health 2021;4(6):658-63.

24. Yashashana A, Pollard-Wharton N, Zwi A, Biles B. Indigenous Australians at increased risk of COVID-19 due to existing health and socioeconomic inequities. Lancet Reg Health West Pac 2020;1:100007.

25. Zimmermann P, Pittet L, Curtis N. How common is long COVID in children and adolescents? Pediatr Infect Dis J 2021;40(12):e482-87.

26. Murdoch Children's Research Institute. Frequently asked COVID-19 questions. Melbourne: MCRI, 2021 [Accessed 24 November 2021].

27. Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation. Clinical guidance for COVID-19 vaccine providers. Canberra; ATAGI, 2022 [Accessed 5 May 2022].

Contact details

Opening hours

8:00 am to 8:00 pm AEDT
Monday to Friday

Media

Partnerships

RACGP endorsements

Other websites

Payments

Membership

Procurement

Connect with us

Do you have a suggestion?

Whistleblower disclosure

Do you have a complaint?

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the land and sea in which we live and work, we recognise their continuing connection to land, sea and culture and pay our respects to Elders past, present and future.

© 2024 The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) ABN 34 000 223 807

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Escalating care for patients with red flag symptoms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Red flag symptoms and vital signs are suggestive of severe disease. Patients with red flag symptoms should be immediately assessed. They might require urgent care in a hospital emergency department or by ambulance services.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 8: Red Flag: The Fallacy of Reverence: Appeal to Authority

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 8: Red Flag: The Fallacy of Reverence: Appeal to Authority

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: The appeal to authority is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument is bolstered by referencing the opinion of an authority figure, or someone perceived as an authority, rather than presenting direct evidence. This can mislead people into accepting claims without proper scrutiny.

Connection: In the context of the appeal to authority, the definition of the claim is crucial as it often relies on the perceived credibility of an authority rather than substantiated evidence. To recognize bias, one must discern whether the authority’s status is influencing the acceptance of the claim. Evaluating the source involves scrutinizing the authority’s expertise and relevance to the claim. Evaluating the evidence requires a thorough examination of the facts presented, independent of the authority’s opinion. The summary conclusion would be that while authority can add weight to an argument, it should not overshadow the importance of direct evidence and critical thinking in validating claims.

Object: The objective of identifying the appeal to authority is to encourage individuals to critically evaluate claims based on the evidence provided, not merely on the reputation of the authority cited. It serves as a red flag for potential manipulation or unfounded assertions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Appeal to Authority Fallacy: Definition and Examples | Grammarly Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you need to support a claim, it can be tempting to support it with a statement from an authority figure. But if done improperly, this could be a logical fallacy-the appeal to authority fallacy.

While experts are often the best people to reference for credible information, it's possible to use an expert's statement in a way that isn't logically sound. There are a few ways to do this, and they're all forms of the appeal to authority fallacy.

Write with Grammarly

What is the appeal to authority fallacy?

The appeal to authority fallacy is the logical fallacy of saying a claim is true simply because an authority figure made it. This authority figure could be anyone: an instructor, a politician, a well-known academic, an author, or even an individual with experience related to the claim's subject.

The statement itself may be true. A statement's truthfulness has nothing to do with whether it's fallacious or not. What makes the appeal to authority a logical fallacy is the lack of evidence provided to support the claim. It follows this format:
Individual, who is an expert in Y field, says X is true. Therefore, X is true.
Just like the other "appeal to" fallacies, the appeal to authority fallacy is a fallacy of relevance. That means the claim the arguer makes to support their statement is irrelevant to the discussion and thus illogical. Other fallacies of relevance include the bandwagon fallacy and the red herring fallacy .

You might ask yourself, "How can an authority's statement be irrelevant? Isn't citing credible sources the basis of a logically sound argument?"

Well, yes. And this is where the appeal to authority fallacy can get tricky. Unlike, for example, an appeal to pity , it's possible for an appeal to authority to be a logically sound argument. This isn't the only type of argument that has both fallacious and non-fallacious uses. Others include the slippery slope and fallacies. The difference between a fallacious and non-fallacious appeal to authority, like these others, is it's used.

Take a look at this example:

"My adviser told me I'm a stronger candidate for grad school if I take advanced writing courses."

Alone, it's a declarative sentence . But look at it in a conversation.

Grad school admissions counselor: To get into grad school at our university, you need at least a 3.5 GPA.

Applicant: My adviser told me I'm a stronger candidate for grad school if I take advanced writing courses.

It might be a true statement, but in the context of this conversation, that doesn't matter. The applicant's adviser isn't part of the grad school's admissions office, and their statement about advanced writing courses doesn't negate the counselor's statement about the required GPA. This is what makes it an appeal to authority fallacy.

However, the statement can also be used in a non-fallacious way. Here is another exchange.

Student A: I really want to go to grad school, but I'm not sure how to stand out from the other applicants.

Student B: My adviser told me I'm a stronger candidate for grad school if I take advanced writing courses.

Notice how in this second example, the statement isn't used as an argument or a rebuttal. It's a declarative sentence that communicates a fact that could help Student A plan their course load.

What are the different types of the appeal to authority fallacy?

Not all appeal to authority arguments attribute their claim to a legitimate, qualified authority. Sometimes, an arguer attributes their claim to a figure who's an authority in an unrelated field-and other times, to a figure who's not an authority at all!

Appeal to false authority

For example, you might claim that your older sister, who holds a master's in literature, said it's perfectly fine to use MLA format for your lab report. This is an appeal to false authority. Your sister might hold an advanced degree, but as a literature student, it's likely she never or rarely used APA format. Therefore, she's not an expert on the kind of formatting that's required in science courses.

Another name for the appeal to false authority fallacy is an appeal to unqualified authority.

Appeal to anonymous authority

An appeal to anonymous authority is an appeal to authority that doesn't attribute the claim to any specific person. Rather, the arguer attributes it to an unnamed individual or, more commonly, group of individuals. Here are a few examples:

Authors say you have to write every day if you want to become a good writer.

According to scientists, 5G is harmful.

They're trying to ban plastic shopping bags.

As seen in the last example, an appeal to anonymous authority can be attributed to a group as vague as "they."

Legitimate appeals to authority

As we mentioned earlier, there are some instances where supporting a claim with an expert's insight is logically sound. For an appeal to authority to be legitimate, the authority must be qualified to speak on the subject being discussed, their statement must be directly relevant to that subject.

For example, you might reduce your sugar intake and tell your friends you chose to do this because your doctor told you it would improve your health. In this case, your doctor is qualified to give you medical and lifestyle advice, so there's nothing illogical about telling your friends that this is why you began eating less sugar.

However, if you were to write a research paper on why excessive sugar consumption is harmful to humans' health, it would be fallacious to cite your doctor's advice as a source. If your doctor conducted peer-reviewed studies on sugar's effects on human health, then citing those studies would be a different story. But your doctor's personalized medical advice to you isn't sufficient evidence to support the claims you make in your academic .

How to avoid using the appeal to authority fallacy

The key to avoiding the appeal to authority fallacy in your writing is to cite only credible facts and data. When you mention your source's authors in your work, structure your references in a way that demonstrates that you're citing their findings, rather than simply name-dropping them. Take a look at these two examples.
Appeal to authority fallacy:
"Dr. Plano, an expert on modern European drama, said the lamp in Strindberg's represents the captain's mental state."
Logically sound appeal:
"Through her extensive research, Dr. Plano has explored the lamp featured prominently in Strindberg's and written about its role as a symbol of the captain's mental state."

Appeal to authority fallacy examples

"My mentor, who holds a PhD in philosophy, said philosophy is the most challenging academic discipline. That's why I decided to study art history."

"Scientists have proved that the only way to catch a cold is to be exposed to a cold virus."

Appeal to authority fallacy FAQ

What is the appeal to authority fallacy?

The appeal to authority fallacy is the logical fallacy of claiming that because an expert said something is true then it must be true.

How does the appeal to authority fallacy work?

Typically, the appeal to authority fallacy follows this format:
Individual, who is an expert in Y field, says X is true. Therefore, X is true.
What are the different kinds of appeal to authority fallacies?

Additionally, there are instances where citing an authority's expertise to support a claim a logical fallacy. These are known as legitimate appeals to authority.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Appeal to Authority Fallacy: Definition and Examples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you need to support a claim, it can be tempting to support it with a statement from an authority figure. But if...

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 12: Reasons for Belief: The Heart of Interaction: Emotional Connection.

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 12: Reasons for Belief: The Heart of Interaction: Emotional Connection.

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: Emotional connection is the bond that forms when people share feelings that lead to a sense of closeness and attachment. It’s the foundation of empathy, understanding, and deep interpersonal relationships.

Connection: The journey through the realm of the unexplained is a meticulous one, where each step is crucial in piecing together the puzzle. It begins with defining the claim, setting clear parameters for what is being investigated. This is followed by recognizing bias, both in ourselves and in others, which could color the interpretation of the data. Next, we evaluate the source of the information, ensuring it is credible and unbiased. The evidence is then evaluated, scrutinized for its validity and relevance to the claim. Finally, a summary conclusion is drawn, encapsulating the findings and reflecting on the implications, while remaining open to future insights that could further illuminate the unknown. This process is not just about seeking answers, but also about fostering a disciplined approach to understanding the world around us.

Object: The objective of fostering emotional connections is to enrich our interactions and relationships. It allows for a deeper level of communication, enhances trust, and creates a supportive environment where individuals can thrive emotionally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Key points

The key to emotional connection in a marriage is responding to each other's emotional needs.

Even though it's hard to see and recognize, emotional neglect in a marriage causes real pain.

Emotional connection is not a thing that you either have or don't have; it's an action that you can take.

Emotional neglect in a relationship is the absence of enough emotional awareness and response. It may be invisible to everyone, even the couple themselves, yet it's painful. Both partners are hurt by what is not there.

In a now-classic 2004 study, researcher John Gottman found that the difference between couples that thrive and those that divorce is the frequency with which couples meet each other's requests for emotional connection.

When it comes to relationships, feelings provide the connection, the warmth, the fire, and the glue. It is vital that couples reach out and respond to each other emotionally.

So what happens if you or your partner simply isn't capable of requesting or responding? Beyond that, what if it's no one's fault?

The Emotionally Neglectful Relationship

If I had to describe an emotionally neglectful marriage in one word, it would probably be . It's as if you have someone right beside you, yet they are a thousand miles away emotionally. You can see them but you can't feel their presence. You can talk to them but you can't talk the way you want to talk. You are with them, but you feel alone.

It's almost as if there is a wall between you blocking you from them, and them from you. A wall you can see through, but you can't get through. That wall is made up of emotional neglect.

How Childhood Emotional Neglect Creeps Into a Marriage

Actually, it doesn't exactly creep in. Instead, it strides through the back door, silently and stealthily undermining communication, connection, compassion, and warmth in your relationship.

Usually, emotional neglect is brought into the marriage through the childhood of one or both of the partners. When one or both partners comes from a family that's not aware of feelings and under-attends to them (childhood emotional neglect), that partner naturally continues that process.

Growing up with emotional neglect makes you blind to your own emotions, the essential ingredient that is absolutely necessary to connect in a real way with your spouse. The " emotion blindness" also extends to your partner. You may have difficulty noticing and responding to their feelings as well. This may result in an emotionally lonely partner.

If you and your partner both brought the emotional blind spot into your relationship, then a somewhat different problem ensues, because neither of you can see what's missing. Neither of you may realize what should be happening and what you should be feeling. With no one able to call out the problem, you are in danger of slowly, painfully drifting apart until the growing wall of emotional neglect distorts your vision of each other, and the positive, healthy feelings that brought you together slowly drain away.

The Issue of Blame

In most families, blame has no place when it comes to emotional neglect. No child asks to be emotionally neglected, and most parents have no idea they're emotionally neglectful. That's how emotional neglect works: The emotional blind spot transfers silently from one generation to the next.

But, while no one is responsible for the emotional neglect they received, once we are aware of the problem, we are responsible for the emotional neglect we give. Once we see it in ourselves, we become the change agent. We become responsible for stopping the cycle.

No one says it's an easy "fix." But the problem of emotional neglect in a marriage can be resolved. The skills of emotional intimacy and connection are learnable.

10 Signs That Emotional Neglect Is Silently Undermining Your Relationship

1. You and your partner misread each other's true feelings, actions, thoughts, or intentions very often.

2. As a couple, you avoid bringing up difficult things so as not to upset the other.

3. You haven't figured out how to argue productively.

4. Your conversations are mostly focused on facts, events, or logistics.

5. Your spouse is not the first person you want to tell when something great happens or a problem comes up.

6. If you seek comfort from your spouse they often say the wrong thing.

7. You don't feel like you're a team taking on life together.

8. You often feel alone when you're with your partner.

9. It can be difficult to find something to talk about together.

10. Positive emotions like love, warmth, or emotional bonding feel awkward or only happen during sex.

So What Now?

First, if some of these 10 apply to your marriage, consider the possibility that emotional neglect is at work. Then, remind yourself that blame is unhelpful and unnecessary here.

Now, keeping the Gottman research in mind, think of emotional connection in a new way. Instead of thinking of it as a thing that you either do or don't have, think of it as an action- aprocess of give-and-take that you and your partner actively do.

Ask your spouse for emotional support, or to share in a happy, sad, or painful moment. Watch for times when they are requesting an emotional bond with you, and provide it.

Ask - Give - Take. Ask - Give - Take. Each time you do it, you are removing the invisible pain from your marriage. You are healing the emotional neglect, one step at a time.

Finally, instead of being silently hurt by what isn't there, you will be connected and enriched by what you have created together.

© Jonice Webb, Ph.D.
Facebook image: Travelpixs/Shutterstock

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Red Flags of Emotional Neglect in a Relationship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
10. You only feel positive emotions during sex.

# data[].attributes.headline
#Post 9: Red Flag: The Natural Fallacy: Unveiling the “All Natural” Myth

# data[].attributes.subject
#Post 9: Red Flag: The Natural Fallacy: Unveiling the “All Natural” Myth

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: The term “All Natural” is often used to describe products or substances that are derived from natural sources without artificial additives. However, this label can be misleading as it implies safety and healthfulness, which is not always the case.

Connection: When we define the claim of “All Natural,” we’re referring to products purportedly made without synthetic additives. However, it’s essential to recognize bias in marketing strategies that exploit the positive connotations of naturalness. Evaluating the source of such claims often reveals a lack of regulatory definition, leading consumers to assume unwarranted benefits. Evaluating the evidence requires a critical look at scientific data to discern the actual impact of natural versus synthetic components on safety and efficacy. The summary conclusion is that the “All Natural” label should be approached with skepticism, as it does not inherently guarantee a product’s safety or health benefits, underscoring the need for thorough investigation and understanding beyond face-value claims.

Object: The objective in scrutinizing the “All Natural” label is to understand that natural does not automatically equate to safe or beneficial. Many natural substances can be harmful, and synthetic substances can be perfectly safe. It’s a red flag for critical thinking about product claims