Excuses Excuses Excuses!!!!!!!!! That's what anyone who is hazed must make.

II Corinthians 10:3-6
3For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
5Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
6And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.
Ephesians 5:1-13
1Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
2And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
3But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
5For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7Be not ye therefore partakers with them.
8For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:
9(For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)
10Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
11And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
12For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.
13But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.



Cognitive Dissonance and how pledging makes a fool out of you and you don’t even know it.

First, no one wants to oppose hazing on Christian Moral Grounds, or any Moral Grounds for that matter. When the Spirit of God is absent, the conscience of an individual is all you have to hope for. When I first heard the term Cognitive Dissonance (CD), I immediately thought of people I had personal conversations with who wanted to be Greek, were Greek, and who had denounced. They all were facing some from of CD. All CD really amounts out to be is satanic deception to a high degree.

I ask many the question; would you allow anyone to slap, paddle, humiliate or degrade you? NO!

Why are you still allowing the brutality? I have come too far to turn back now.

So you are willfully and knowingly turning your back on God? I guess so.

So why continue? Well, once I get in, I can do a lot of good things.

You can do this without the GLO. True!

Next, I would like to tell you what I personally know as one who has been pledged and pledged others. First, it is the most unfair set of circumstances. The members are only pledged ONCE, but once members, can pledge anyone, anywhere, anytime as long as they live. 8 weeks of being pledged is no comparison to 8 years of terrorizing others. Hazing’s purpose is to RE-create the aspirant in the GLO’s own image and likeness. The positive lessons learned during pledging (time management, working together (sometimes under pressure) are no different than what a good leadership class can teach you without a paddle or some foul-mouth breathing profanities down your neck. Members claim that pledging prepares you for the harsh realities of life. Life does that all by itself. After a person goes over, they are introduced to the surrounding community, recognized for their hard fought quest to Greekdom. When reading about CD, Fraternity and sorority hazing is one of the premier and prime places to find it. Why? Hazing ALWAYS presents a double jeopardy………Desire for Membership vs. Brutality!!!!!!!

NORMAL THINKING INDIVIDUALS- WHAT YOU THINK YOU WOULD FIND AT A COLLEGE UNIVERSITY, ARE DOING, JUSTIFYING, PARTICIPATING (GIVING AND RECEIVING), TAKING PRIDE IN, ETC. THEIR PLEDGE PROCESSES.

You want to discuss CULTS. These are some of the most HEINOUS.

WHAT NORMAL PERSON WOULD ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN TO THEM? AS A MATTER OF FACT, A COLLEGE STUDENT WITH A “B” AVERAGE?

1.) SLAPPING THE NECK, BACK, FACE, (COMMONLY RESULTS IN A RUPTURED EAR DRUM) AND CHEST WITH ONE OR BOTH HANDS.

2.) PADDLING WITH WOODEN PADDLES,

3.) BEATEN WITH RUBBER TIRES,

4.) BEATEN WITH TREE VINES,

5.) PADDLED WITH TABLE LEGS,

6.) WHIPPED WITH COAT HANGERS, AND ANYTHING ELSE IMAGINABLE.

7.) HANGING, "WITHOUT THE INTENTION TO CAUSE DEATH",

8.) BURNING (NOT THE VOLUNTARY BRANDING),

9.) RUSSIAN ROULETTE,

10.) STEALING,

11.) DRINKING (SOMETIMES TO DEATH),

12.) BLINDFOLDING

13.) KICKING,

14.) HITTING OVER THE HEAD WITH A FRYING PAN,

15.) STUNNED WITH STUN GUNS,

16.) PUNCHING ALL OVER, INCLUDING THE FACE.

17.) FORCED TO CUT THE HAIR A CERTAIN WAY FOR RITUALISTIC PUPROSES SUCH AS PLEDGING, STEPPING, OR ANY OTHER REASON.

18.) HAVING TO TAKE AN OATH THAT GOES AGAINST YOUR RELIGIOUS PRINCIPLES,

19.) CONSTANT REPETITION OF WORDS AND PHRASES (i.e. MANTRA,

20.) EATING FOODS (onions, butter, and Tabasco sauce at once) THAT WOULD MAKE A PIG THROW UP.

21.) JUMPING OUT 5 STORY WINDOWS,

22.) BEING BEATEN WITH A HAMMER.

23.) GETTING SPAT ON

24.) ABANDONMENT (TAKEN TO THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE TO FIND YOUR WAY BACK),

25.) INVOLUNTARY BRANDING, AND

26.) RELIGIOUS RIDICULE.

Now let’s look at cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".
Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:
 if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
 and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".
Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger and associates, arising out of a participant observation study of a cult which believed that the earth was going to be destroyed by a flood, and what happened to its members — particularly the really committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs to work for the cult — when the flood did not happen. While fringe members were more inclined to recognise that they had made fools of themselves and to "put it down to experience", committed members were more likely to re-interpret the evidence to show that they were right all along (the earth was not destroyed because of the faithfulness of the cult members).
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm


Description
This is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.
Dissonance increases with:
• The importance of the subject to us.
• How strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict.
• Our inability to rationalize and explain away the conflict.
Dissonance is often strong when we believe something about ourselves and then do something against that belief. If I believe I am good but do something bad, then the discomfort I feel as a result is cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful motivator which will often lead us to change one or other of the conflicting belief or action. The discomfort often feels like a tension between the two opposing thoughts. To release the tension we can take one of three actions:
• Change our behavior.
• Justify our behavior by changing the conflicting cognition.
• Justify our behavior by adding new cognitions.
Dissonance is most powerful when it is about our self-image. Feelings of foolishness, immorality and so on (including internal projections during decision-making) are dissonance in action.
If an action has been completed and cannot be undone, then the after-the-fact dissonance compels us to change our beliefs. If beliefs are moved, then the dissonance appears during decision-making, forcing us to take actions we would not have taken before.
Cognitive dissonance appears in virtually all evaluations and decisions and is the central mechanism by which we experience new differences in the world. When we see other people behave differently to our images of them, when we hold any conflicting thoughts, we experience dissonance.
Dissonance increases with the importance and impact of the decision, along with the difficulty of reversing it. Discomfort about making the wrong choice of car is bigger than when choosing a lamp.
Note: Self-Perception Theory gives an alternative view.
Research
Festinger first developed this theory in the 1950s to explain how members of a cult who were persuaded by their leader, a certain Mrs Keech, that the earth was going to be destroyed on 21st December and that they alone were going to be rescued by aliens, actually increased their commitment to the cult when this did not happen (Festinger himself had infiltrated the cult, and would have been very surprised to meet little green men). The dissonance of the thought of being so stupid was so great that instead they revised their beliefs to meet with obvious facts: that the aliens had, through their concern for the cult, saved the world instead.
In a more mundane experiment, Festinger and Carlsmith got students to lie about a boring task. Those who were paid $1 felt uncomfortable lying.
Example
Smokers find all kinds of reasons to explain away their unhealthy habit. The alternative is to feel a great deal of dissonance.
So what?
Using it
Cognitive dissonance is central to many forms of persuasion to change beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviors. The tension can be injected suddenly or allowed to build up over time. People can be moved in many small jumps or one large one.
Defending
When you start feeling uncomfortable, stop and see if you can find the inner conflict. Then notice how that came about. If it was somebody else who put that conflict there, you can decide not to play any more with them.
See also
Consistency Theory, Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy, External Justification, Insufficient Punishment, Post-Decision Dissonance, Self-Perception Theory
http://tip.psychology.org/festinge.html, http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/stephens/cdback.html
References
Festinger (1957), Festinger and Carlsmith (1959)
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/cognitive_dissonance.htm



" Cognitive dissonance: when an individual holds two opposing beliefs in tension, he or she experiences tension which may be resolved by changing one of the views. When people who view themselves as smart, reasonable people participate in degrading experiences, they may look back and minimize the extent that they experienced degradation. Otherwise they would be left saying to themselves, "I'm a smart person and I joined a group that degraded me," which would create tension. Saying to oneself, “It wasn't that bad,” creates less tension. As a result, individuals in a group that is hazed may eventually feel positively about the group that subjected them to the experience. Groupthink: Irving Janis (1997) described a process in highly cohesive groups in which faulty decision-making arises as a result of a convergence of dynamics, including pressure for unanimity, suppression of individual moral objections, and degradation of outsiders. These dynamics result in a failure to realistically appraise alternative courses of action and may contribute to disregard for the safety of others. In Wrongs of Passage, Hank Nuwer (2001) adapted the term "groupthink" to become "Greekthink," a reference to the dangerous process in which fraternal groups engage in reckless rituals, put newcomers in danger, and demonstrate post-incident denial in the face of clear evidence that they have made a mistake. Cognitive dissonance: when an individual holds two opposing beliefs in tension, he or she experiences tension which may be resolved by changing one of the views. When people who view themselves as smart, reasonable people participate in degrading experiences, they may look back and minimize the extent that they experienced degradation. Otherwise they would be left saying to themselves, "I'm a smart person and I joined a group that degraded me," which would create tension. Saying to oneself, “It wasn't that bad,” creates less tension. As a result, individuals in a group that is hazed may eventually feel positively about the group that subjected them to the experience. Groupthink: Irving Janis (1997) described a process in highly cohesive groups in which faulty decision-making arises as a result of a convergence of dynamics, including pressure for unanimity, suppression of individual moral objections, and degradation of outsiders. These dynamics result in a failure to realistically appraise alternative courses of action and may contribute to disregard for the safety of others. In Wrongs of Passage, Hank Nuwer (2001) adapted the term "groupthink" to become "Greekthink," a reference to the dangerous process in which fraternal groups engage in reckless rituals, put newcomers in danger, and demonstrate post-incident denial in the face of clear evidence that they have made a mistake." http://www.hazing.cornell.edu/issues/research_theory.html

COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE THEORY
BALANCE THEORY motivates us to try to maintain harmony among our perceptions, attitudes and beliefs. We can become very disturbed and "imbalanced" when someone we like disagrees with us about something important to us such as an attitude about politics, religion or the way we are conducting our life.
COGNITIVE-DISSONANCE THEORY recognizes that people dislike inconsistency, for instance when our attitudes and beliefs are inconsistent or our attitudes and behaviors are contradictory. COGNITIVE DISSONANCE is an unpleasant state, a feeling of intellectual discomfort, and we are motivated to reduce the tension.
When we do ATTITUDE-DISCREPANT BEHAVIOR, behavior that runs counter to one's thoughts and values, we try to justify our behavior. We may use self-deception or change our attitudes to reduce the psychological tension. We often engage in JUSTIFICATION OF EFFORT, explaining to others why we have done what we have done.
For instance most people hold a belief that one should be honest. When one tells a "white lie" to "save another person's feeling" he has used self-deception to reduce the cognitive dissonance. People give a million "reasons" why they might "cheat" on their income taxes, all of them designed to reduce the dissonance or tension between their belief in honesty and their behavior.
CHANGING ATTITUDES: THE PROCESS OF PERSUASION
PERSUASION is the attempt to change the attitudes of others. Advertisers rely heavily on the research of social psychology to persuade you to buy their products. The persuasive process is influenced by the who (the source), the what (the message), the means (the channel) and to whom (the receiver).
SOURCE FACTORS are the credibility of the persuader. Does he/she have expertise in the area? Do they appear trustworthy? Is he or she likeable and attractive? It helps if they are similar to the person being persuaded.
MESSAGE FACTORS include whether the message is repeated often, whether it appeals to logic or fear and whether or not it is a two-sided argument that includes the opposite viewpoint.
CHANNEL FACTORS include the means for delivering the message. Is it given in person, on television or in a newspaper, magazine or internet?
RECEIVER FACTORS include preexisting attitudes, personality, intelligence and expectations of the receiver.
Thus changing attitudes involves a complex interplay of many factors that may persuade someone to change their attitude, value or behavior.
http://inst.santafe.cc.fl.us/~mwehr/StudyGM/MODten.htm