“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless yet be determined to make them otherwise.” (Footnotes 1) F. Scott Fitzgerald
Here, Fitzgerald perfectly illustrates the concept in psychology coined cognitive dissonance: the perception of contradictory information (e.g. feelings, actions, beliefs, and etc.) and the stress engendered from it.
I would like to discuss the type of dissonance we experience when facing existential contradictions: the perennial conflicting beliefs that we hold due to the human condition. I strongly believe the inability to reconcile the contradictions and coping with dissonance is a strong factor of human suffering.
There are many similarities between the textbook concept of cognitive dissonance with what I’m trying to discuss, but the main area of difference is reduction which are the methods individuals attempt to seek psychological consistency.
Because the types of contradictions one faces are existential and eternal in nature (Footnotes 2) I personally think it is clearer to outline the relationships one has with the contradictions instead of the methods of reducing the dissonance.
I’ll use the classic example of “meaning of life” to demonstrate the four relationships with existential contradictions:
The first type of relationship with contradiction is being ignorant of it due to circumstance
It is crucial for me to emphasize that they are ignorant due to circumstance and not choice as that would be the second type of relationship, namely distraction. Here, the individual is not at fault for not facing the contradiction as they never had the opportunity to.
Some may envy this group by quoting the aphorism “Ignorance is bliss.” However, for the majority of people, I believe this is an impermanent relationship. If the individual matures, learns about their environment and others, the contradictions will come into light. I believe this is true for many cases (e.g. meaning, relationships, beliefs, etc)
Due to the individual being ignorant of the contradiction, there would naturally be no dissonance that arises from this relationship.
Many large contradictions that bring existential dissonance prompt individuals to distract themselves from it. I believe that the dissonance would exponentially intensify as the contradiction resurfaces itself to the individual throughout life. Even small contradictions are difficult to face and brings about rationalization. You can imagine how large contradictions necessitate larger distractions.
I believe the majority of those who face the contradiction in meaning choose not to introspect and develop their own meaning, but to take the path of lesser resistance: to adopt values and meaning imposed by others. Some may choose social validation or financial success. Once you remove the utility of those attainments, it would leave one bereft of any true fulfillment.
Jean-Paul Sartre describes this as “bad faith” where an individual acquiesces to pressures of society which leads to adoption of false values and in conclusion living inauthentically. Most importantly, this describes one’s renouncement of the freedom they are given as a human being.
Bad faith is the failure to meet the obligations of one's own freedom. It is the choice to hide from the truth and evade the freedom that is one's birthright. — Jean-Paul Sartre
This toxic relationship is unfortunately the most common one. Individuals often live decades of their lives adopting values of others to distract themselves from the fact that they have yet to find an answer for themselves. I believe that throughout their life, the dissonance would grow unabated until they become bitter, self resenting, and cynical.
In this relationship, the individual chooses to distract themselves from the contradiction to avoid the existential dissonance that arises and as a result, the dissonance may grow unbearable.