Doublethink would avoid a " killing the messenger " attitude that could disturb the Command structure. Thus doublethink is the key tool of self-discipline for the Party, complementing the state-imposed discipline of propaganda and the police state. These tools together hide the government's evil not just from the people but from the government itself—but without the confusion and misinformation associated with primitive totalitarian regimes.
Doublethink is critical in allowing the Party to know what its true goals are without recoiling from them, avoiding the conflation of a regime's egalitarian propaganda with its true purpose. Paradoxically, during the long and harrowing process in which the protagonist Winston Smith is systematically tortured and broken, he contemplates using doublethink as the ultimate recourse in his rebellion—to let himself become consciously a loyal party member while letting his hatred of the party remain an unconscious presence deep in his mind and let it surface again at the very moment of his execution so that "the bullet would enter a free mind" with which the Thought Police would not have a chance to tamper again.
Since when Nineteen Eighty-Four was published the word doublethink has become synonymous with relieving cognitive dissonance by ignoring the contradiction between two world views —or even of deliberately seeking to relieve cognitive dissonance. Some schools of psychotherapy such as cognitive therapy encourage people to alter their own thoughts as a way of treating different psychological maladies see cognitive distortions.
Orwell's "doublethink" is also credited with having inspired the commonly used term " doublespeak ", which itself does not appear in the book.
Comparisons have been made between doublespeak and Orwell's descriptions on political speech from his essay " Politics and the English Language ", in which "unscrupulous politicians, advertisers, religionists, and other doublespeakers of whatever stripe continue to abuse language for manipulative purposes". From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This article is about the concept in Nineteen Eighty-Four.
For the distortion of language inspired by this concept, see Doublespeak. For the Akala album, see DoubleThink.
For the London production company, see Doublethink Theatre. This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. September Learn how and when to remove this template message. This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Novels portal.
The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford University Press. The paradox is expressed most succinctly in the novel in the three Party slogans: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength. The term is widely used to describe a capacity to engage in one line of thought in one situation at work, in a certain group, in business, etc. Digital Done Write.
Retrieved 27 April Nineteen Eighty-Four. English Journal.
George Orwell 's Nineteen Eighty-Four. Book Category. Categories : Fictional elements introduced in Nineteen Eighty-Four Words originating in fiction Propaganda techniques Cognitive dissonance. Become a Friend of Aeon to save articles and enjoy other exclusive benefits. Aeon email newsletters are issued by the not-for-profit, registered charity Aeon Media Group Ltd Australian Business Number 80 This Email Newsletter Privacy Statement pertains to the personally identifying information you voluntarily submit in the form of your email address to receive our email newsletters.
We will retain your information for as long as needed in light of the purposes for which is was obtained or to comply with our legal obligations and enforce our agreements. You may request a copy of the personal information we hold about you by submitting a written request to support aeon. We will try and respond to your request as soon as reasonably practical. When you receive the information, if you think any of it is wrong or out of date, you can ask us to change or delete it for you.
Elijah Millgram. He writes extensively about the theory of rationality. In that dystopia, Newspeak was a language designed by ideological technicians to make politically incorrect thoughts literally inexpressible. Fewer people know that Orwell also worried about the poverty of our ordinary, unregimented vocabulary. But Orwell was badly mistaken, and not just for ignoring the fact that English already picks up new words on a daily basis. His reasons for wanting that extra expressive power are, uncharacteristically, poorly thought-out.
And understanding why that is will put us in a position to explain a lot of what goes under the heading of metaphysics. Imagine you really did have a repertoire of concepts and names that allowed you to say exactly what you meant, pretty much whatever you noticed, or whatever occurred to you. Imagine really having precise terms for all those flavour notes. Orwell was especially worried about capturing our inner lives, so imagine also having words for the day-to-day events that remind you of particular experiences that only you have undergone.
Orwell describes doublethink as &#;the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one&#;s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. '; In , doublethink is the normal way of thought, and as a result everyone understands it and practices it. Free Essay: What is doublethink? Orwell describes doublethink as “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously.
Feeling a little swamped? F or the most part, our repertoire of concepts and labels for individuals is important because we use it in our reasoning. Descriptions are useful in that we can draw conclusions from them. Back in the 18th century, the philosopher David Hume thought that we were mostly led from one belief to another by causes, and he thought we learned that A s cause B s by seeing lots of A s followed by lots of B s.
It would mean that in order to add a causal connection to your intellectual repertoire, somebody or other would have to take the time to observe all those A s and B s. The point generalises: those inferential connections are expensive, and we can afford only so many of them. So if you want to think effectively, you have to be selective.
You have to confine your descriptions of the world around you, of your inner life and all the rest of it, to the descriptions that someone has invested in, doing what was needed to embed them in a network of usable inferential links. Go ahead, use words that misdescribe whatever it is. Choose terms that let you draw conclusions. Tag what you said as pretty much true, or almost entirely true, or true enough , or technically true, or maybe just good enough for government work.
Maybe Orwell was right that we need to invent more words. I do think we could use more qualifiers such as these. Philosophers in the English-speaking world for the most part think of truth as an all-or-nothing matter.