3 ms·
I believe that is cohesion which isn't inherently linked to group think but attempts to promote may lead to it. To use a cliche combat context it is like loyal
by Nasrudith 7y ago
I believe that is cohesion which isn't inherently linked to group think but attempts to promote may lead to it.
To use a cliche combat context it is like loyalty effectively. There may be questions of whether to attack from the woods or an open field with tank support and working together is more important than one or another as even the situational "wrong" choice is better than a split effort.
However absolute blind loyalty ends only in needless tears from trying to shoot tanks with pistols, charging the no man's land into machine guns, massacre of villages, or military coups.
The dangerous aspect is the "delusion" in both.
- bilbo0s 7y agoMilitary is a bad example. I can tell you from experience, it's not a place that runs on "groupthink", or "consensus" views. A decision is made by a decision maker, and that decision is implemented. In the military they even have the "mind guards" that "insulate leadership from criticism" that were mentioned in another comment. Only in the military, we call them "NCO's". You can be diametrically opposed to a decision in the military if you like. Heck, you can think whatever you want in the military, because no one cares what you think.