Amazon Prime Free Trial
FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button and confirm your Prime free trial.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited FREE Prime delivery
- Streaming of thousands of movies and TV shows with limited ads on Prime Video.
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
-40% $14.99$14.99
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
$13.95$13.95
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: We Care About Books
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Audible sample
Follow the authors
OK
Mistakes Were Made (but Not By Me) Third Edition: Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts Paperback – August 4, 2020
Purchase options and add-ons
Why is it so hard to say “I made a mistake”—and really believe it?
When we make mistakes, cling to outdated attitudes, or mistreat other people, we must calm the cognitive dissonance that jars our feelings of self-worth. And so, unconsciously, we create fictions that absolve us of responsibility, restoring our belief that we are smart, moral, and right—a belief that often keeps us on a course that is dumb, immoral, and wrong. Backed by years of research, Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) offers a fascinating explanation of self-justification—how it works, the damage it can cause, and how we can overcome it.
“Entertaining, illuminating and—when you recognize yourself in the stories it tells—mortifying.”—Wall Street Journal
“Every page sparkles with sharp insight and keen observation. Mistakes were made—but not in this book!”—Daniel Gilbert, author of Stumbling on Happiness
- Print length464 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- Publication dateAugust 4, 2020
- Dimensions5.31 x 1.16 x 8 inches
- ISBN-100358329612
- ISBN-13978-0358329619
Discover the latest buzz-worthy books, from mysteries and romance to humor and nonfiction. Explore more
Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
PRAISE FOR CAROL TAVRIS’S ANGER
"Witty, provocative, and impressively documented, this work lights a candle in cursed darkness."―LOS ANGELES TIMES
PRAISE FOR ELLIOT ARONSON’S THE SOCIAL ANIMAL
"A rare gem of a book, easy to read but also scientifically sophisticated."―CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY —
About the Author
ELLIOT ARONSON is one of the most distinguished social psychologists in the world. His books include The Social Animal and The Jigsaw Classroom. Chosen by his peers as one of the hundred most influential psychologists of the twentieth century, he was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and is the only psychologist to have won all three of the American Psychological Association’s top awards—for writing, teaching, and research. He lives in Santa Cruz, California.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Knaves, Fools, Villains, and Hypocrites: How Do They Live With Themselves?
Mistakes were quite possibly made by the administrations in which I served.
''Henry Kissinger (responding to charges that he committed war crimes in his role in the United States' actions in Vietnam, Cambodia, and South America in the 1970s)
If, in hindsight, we also discover that mistakes may have been made .?.?. I am deeply sorry.
''Cardinal Edward Egan of New York (referring to the bishops who failed to deal with child molesters among the Catholic clergy)
We know mistakes were made.
''Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase (referring to enormous bonuses paid to the company's executives after the government bailout had kept them from bankruptcy)
Mistakes were made in communicating to the public and customers about the ingredients in our French fries and hash browns.
''mcDonald's (apologizing to vegetarians for failing to inform them that the 'natural flavoring' in its potatoes contained beef byproducts)
This week's question: How can you tell when a presidential scandal is serious?
A. The president's poll numbers drop.
B. The press goes after him.
C. The opposition calls for his impeachment.
D. His own party members turn on him.
E. Or the White House says, 'mistakes were made."
''Bill Schneider, CNN's Inside Politics
As fallible human beings, all of us share the impulse to justify ourselves and avoid taking responsibility for actions that turn out to be harmful, immoral, or stupid. Most of us will never be in a position to make decisions affecting the lives and deaths of millions of people, but whether the consequences of our mistakes are trivial or tragic, on a small scale or a national canvas, most of us find it difficult if not impossible to say 'I was wrong; I made a terrible mistake.' The higher the stakes'''emotional, financial, moral'''the greater the difficulty.
It goes further than that. Most people, when directly confronted by evidence that they are wrong, do not change their point of view or plan of action but justify it even more tenaciously. Politicians, of course, offer the most visible and, often, most tragic examples of this practice. We began writing the first edition of this book during the presidency of George W. Bush, a man whose mental armor of self-justification could not be pierced by even the most irrefutable evidence. Bush was wrong in his claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction; he was wrong in stating that Saddam was linked with al-Qaeda; he was wrong in his prediction that Iraqis would be dancing joyfully in the streets at the arrival of American soldiers; he was wrong in his assurance that the conflict would be over quickly; he was wrong in his gross underestimate of the human and financial costs of the war; and he was most famously wrong in his speech six weeks after the invasion began when he announced (under a banner reading MISSION ACCOMPLISHED) that 'major combat operations in Iraq have ended."
Commentators from the right and left began calling on Bush to admit he had been mistaken, but Bush merely found new justifications for the war: he was getting rid of a 'very bad guy," fighting terrorists, promoting peace in the Middle East, bringing democracy to Iraq, increasing American security, and finishing 'the task [our troops] gave their lives for.' In the midterm election of 2006, which most political observers regarded as a referendum on the war, the Republican Party lost both houses of Congress; a report issued shortly thereafter by sixteen American intelligence agencies announced that the occupation of Iraq had actually increased Islamic radicalism and the risk of terrorism. Yet Bush said to a delegation of conservative columnists, 'I've never been more convinced that the decisions I made are the right decisions."
Of course, George Bush was not the first nor will he be the last politician to justify decisions that were based on incorrect premises or that had disastrous consequences. Lyndon Johnson would not heed the advisers who repeatedly told him the war in Vietnam was unwinnable, and he sacrificed his presidency because of his self-justifying certainty that all of Asia would 'go Communist' if America withdrew. When politicians' backs are against the wall, they may reluctantly acknowledge error but not their responsibility for it. The phrase 'mistakes were made' is such a glaring effort to absolve oneself of culpability that it has become a national joke'''what the political journalist Bill Schneider called the 'past exonerative' tense. "Oh all right, mistakes were made, but not by me, by someone else, someone who shall remain nameless.' When Henry Kissinger said that the administration in which he'd served may have made mistakes, he was sidestepping the fact that as national security adviser and secretary of state (simultaneously), he essentially was the administration. This self-justification allowed him to accept the Nobel Peace Prize with a straight face and a clear conscience.
We look at the behavior of politicians with amusement or alarm or horror, but what they do is no different in kind, though certainly in consequence, from what most of us have done at one time or another in our private lives. We stay in an unhappy relationship or one that is merely going nowhere because, after all, we invested so much time in making it work. We stay in a deadening job way too long because we look for all the reasons to justify staying and are unable to clearly assess the benefits of leaving. We buy a lemon of a car because it looks gorgeous, spend thousands of dollars to keep the damn thing running, and then spend even more to justify that investment. We self-righteously create a rift with a friend or relative over some real or imagined slight yet see ourselves as the pursuers of peace'''if only the other side would apologize and make amends.
Self-justification is not the same thing as lying or making excuses. Obviously, people will lie or invent fanciful stories to duck the fury of a lover, parent, or employer; to keep from being sued or sent to prison; to avoid losing face; to avoid losing a job; to stay in power. But there is a big difference between a guilty man telling the public something he knows is untrue ('I did not have sex with that woman'; 'I am not a crook') and that man persuading himself that he did a good thing. In the former situation, he is lying and knows he is lying to save his own skin. In the latter, he is lying to himself. That is why self-justification is more powerful and more dangerous than the explicit lie. It allows people to convince themselves that what they did was the best thing they could have done. In fact, come to think of it, it was the right thing. 'there was nothing else I could have done.' 'Actually, it was a brilliant solution to the problem.' 'I was doing the best for the nation.' 'those bastards deserved what they got.' 'I'm entitled."
Self-justification minimizes our mistakes and bad decisions; it also explains why everyone can recognize a hypocrite in action except the hypocrite. It allows us to create a distinction between our moral lapses and someone else's and blur the discrepancy between our actions and our moral convictions. As a character in Aldous Huxley's novel Point Counter Point says, 'I don't believe there's such a thing as a conscious hypocrite.' It seems unlikely that Newt Gingrich said to himself, 'my, what a hypocrite I am. There I was, all riled up about Bill Clinton's sexual affair, while I was having an extramarital affair of my own right here in town.' Similarly, the prominent evangelist Ted Haggard seemed oblivious to the hypocrisy of publicly fulminating against homosexuality while enjoying his own sexual relationship with a male prostitute.
In the same way, we each draw our own moral lines and justify them.
Product details
- Publisher : Mariner Books; Reprint edition (August 4, 2020)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 464 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0358329612
- ISBN-13 : 978-0358329619
- Item Weight : 12.8 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.31 x 1.16 x 8 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #27,337 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #124 in Cognitive Psychology (Books)
- #136 in Popular Social Psychology & Interactions
- #877 in Personal Transformation Self-Help
- Customer Reviews:
About the authors
Carol Tavris is a social psychologist, writer, and lecturer whose goal is to promote psychological science and critical thinking in improving our lives. She is coauthor, with Elliot Aronson, of "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by ME): Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts" and, with Avrum Bluming, "Estrogen Matters: Why taking hormones in menopause can improve women's well-being and lengthen their lives--without raising the risk of breast cancer." Her other major books include the landmark "Anger: The misunderstood emotion” and the award-winning "The Mismeasure of Woman: Why women are not the better sex, the inferior sex, or the opposite sex." She has written hundreds of essays, op-eds, and book reviews on topics in psychological science, writes a column for Skeptic magazine, and is a highly regarded lecturer who has spoken to groups around the world. She is a Fellow of the Association for Psychological Science.
Elliot Aronson is currently Professor Emeritus at the University of California in Santa Cruz. He has long-standing research interests in social influence and attitude change, cognitive dissonance, research methodology, and interpersonal attraction. Professor Aronson's experiments are aimed both at testing theory and at improving the human condition by influencing people to change dysfunctional attitudes and behaviors.
Professor Aronson received his B.A. from Brandeis University in 1954, his M.A. from Wesleyan University in 1956, and his Ph.D. in psychology from Stanford University in 1959. He has taught at Harvard University, the University of Minnesota, the University of Texas, and the University of California. In 1999, he won the American Psychological Association's Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award, making him the only psychologist to have won APA's highest awards in all three major academic categories: distinguished writing (1973), distinguished teaching (1980), and distinguished research (1999).
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonCustomers say
Customers find the book insightful and enlightening. They describe it as an excellent, useful read on an important topic. Many readers find the content disturbing and humbling. The visual style is described as fascinating and simple. However, some feel the book could have been more concise, with less repetition and sufficient explanations.
AI-generated from the text of customer reviews
Customers find the book insightful and well-written. They appreciate the captivating case studies and psychology-related information. The concept is interesting and the book provides a good perspective on oneself.
"This book is a marvelous piece of work — inspiring, life changing even — and premised on a simple notion: cognitive dissonance, and the lengths to..." Read more
"This book is full of knowledge and blew my mind about self justication...." Read more
"...This book will help everyone take responsibility. And to understand those who won’t. I highly recommend it." Read more
"Mistakes Were Made was a provocative book, and we can take away knowledge from it and apply it to our everyday lives...." Read more
Customers find the book easy to read and engaging. They say it's well-written, concise, and clear.
"This book is a marvelous piece of work — inspiring, life changing even — and premised on a simple notion: cognitive dissonance, and the lengths to..." Read more
"...Two stories stand out because they were such wild and easily identifiable fabrications...." Read more
"Very good, very useful book on an important topic...." Read more
"This is an excellent book, with lots of thought-provoking insight to human behavior and how we jettison reason and facts in order to justify the..." Read more
Customers find the book disturbing and humbling. They say it's a frightening and liberating paradigm that articulates torture, mass murder, political lies, war, and divorce.
"...It’s a frightening and liberating paradigm that, once articulated, seems 'unputbackable.'..." Read more
"This is a terrific and disturbing book by two social psychologists...." Read more
"...more recent information, and it remains as compelling, relevant, disturbing, and witty as ever" Read more
"Unnecessary stomach twisting descriptions of crimes to get to a point that could have been stated easier...." Read more
Customers find the visual style engaging. They appreciate the simple representation of cognitive dissonance and self-justification in a straightforward way. The stark reminder of one's innate ability to reduce past harm is also appreciated.
"...and responsibility in it, they enhanced it with a strong, simple visual representation of how we can transition from relatively decent human being..." Read more
"Captivating material, excellent look at the ways we deceive ourselves, rationalize our opinions, double-down rather than admit an error, and believe..." Read more
"A beautifully stark reminder of one's innate ability to reduce the past's harm one causes to another to a more palatable memory of the event...." Read more
"...Fascinating look at the weird world of cognitive dissonance." Read more
Customers find the book too long and lacking in conciseness. They feel it takes about 100 pages to get into anything of substance, and the explanations are not sufficient. The book is repetitive and lacks many headings or subheadings, making it difficult to finish.
"...struggled with the formatting of the book because the authors don’t have many headings or subheadings throughout to note when they are changing..." Read more
"Couldn't finish this book. Quit about a third of the way through...." Read more
"...Ultimately, I think this book could have been a bit more concise...." Read more
"I was kinda tracking with this book the first few chapters, but it’s repetitive and it could have simply been a short essay about cognitive..." Read more
Reviews with images
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
- Reviewed in the United States on March 6, 2015This book is a marvelous piece of work — inspiring, life changing even — and premised on a simple notion: cognitive dissonance, and the lengths to which humans will go to equilibrate it. The authors make a compelling case that cognitive dissonance — trying to balance two diametrically opposed beliefs — is at the heart of most of our problems. Humans, they argue, are wired to cognitively justify their actions and choices as we move through life, while at the same time blindly, almost willfully, spitefully, making horrible and ever-worsening decisions. As a result, we devote an enormous amount of energy, and neural pathways, to creating and maintaining false constructs designed to preserve a sense of individual exceptionalism.
Worse, this pattern of backward justifying occurs for societies as well.
Plumbing the news, case studies and anecdotal accounts, they build a compelling case for how we never, ever seem capable of admitting culpability, much less acknowledging that we made an actual mistake.
Caught cheating on your partner? Clearly, she was withholding affections and any rational person would be forced to seek satisfaction elsewhere. Sent an innocent person to prison? They were probably guilty of something else so what’s the big deal. Invaded a country to seize nonexistent WMDs? Obviously, they moved them, and anyway, the real reason we invaded was to bring Democracy to freedom-starved people.
It’s a truly fascinating lens through which to consider challenges of interpersonal and political interactions, the limits of the justice system, the blind spots of the health care system, barriers to advancing scientific knowledge and much more.
Not only did I find this a revolutionary way to think about the world and my role and responsibility in it, they enhanced it with a strong, simple visual representation of how we can transition from relatively decent human being to a failure standing knee deep in scandal and flailing about for any justification, no matter how farfetched. They envision a pyramid atop which we stand — at the pinnacle, we are morally upright creatures with no pesky dissonance. At the base, way down at the bottom, is a swamp of moral decay. The journey from the top to the bottom is rarely a headlong much less intentional rush, but rather a series of tiny, almost imperceptibly small steps into ever-greyer territory. We ratchet up the balancing act to deal with the increasing dissonance, using retroactive justification and the sometime wholesale rewriting of history, until we are mired in our own moral waste and bewildered as to how we got there.
Political scandals, medical malpractice and divorce proceedings are all perfect examples. No one — well, hardly any one — enters noble careers thinking they will be cheats or act immorally, hide evidence that could free an innocent person or fudge results to preserve theories, etc., but a thousand tiny decisions reinforced by cultural and organizational pressures, begin luring them down the pyramid and, eventually, the gravity of their initially innocent actions pulls them irreversibly into the muck.
Likewise, the hatred and vitriol and vile unearthed in many divorces stand in stark contrast to the relatively happy memories of many relationships, at least early on when love and romance brought two people together. Where does it come from? They posit that cognitive dissonance is to blame, associated with trying to maintain a sense of individual exceptionalism in difficult circumstances. “I’m a good person and good people aren’t to blame for the dissolution of marriages. Therefore, my partner must be a terrible person. Now let me set about prospecting for memories that can back-justify that belief.” Down the pyramid they go.
It’s a frightening and liberating paradigm that, once articulated, seems 'unputbackable.' It cautions us to always think about the cognitions we hold, and how they might be shaping our actions and responses, and blinding us to better courses of action. It warns us to pause and reflect before we act. It underscores the need for oversight of and transparency into our systems and organizations to ensure those in positions of power aren’t inadvertently, blinded by dissonance and therefore acting against the best inters of society.
The book is a bit dated, at 7 years old, but the concepts are sound and important. I would love to see this topic addressed again with a more current treatment of advances in neuroscience. But short of that, given how strongly it resonated with me, and the solid, engaging writing style, I highly recommend.
This line captures the essence of the book well: “The brain is designed with blind spots, optical and psychological, and one of its cleverest tricks is to confer on us the comforting delusion that we, personally, do not have any.”
- Reviewed in the United States on May 29, 2024This book is full of knowledge and blew my mind about self justication. It went through it all and what really dosed the fire of top notch is the dedicated chapters (2, beginning and end) about Trump. Totally against and if you don't like him well the chapters won't make you like him lol. The first chapter was fine and like a warning, I totally get. I am NOT a "for him" individual(no maga hat here). But the last chapter, I felt like the whole book was teaching to be objective and seemed like a vindictive snap at him (trump).
Seemed pouty and really put a damper on such a fire read.
It's worth the read. I took alot of time to really digest. If you wanted to make. Book about what TRump did wrong well do it make a whole book but this cut and pasted chapters weren't it.
- Reviewed in the United States on September 27, 2022This is a terrific and disturbing book by two social psychologists. Terrific because it explains a lot of the behavior you see both around you and nationally. Disturbing because, unless you are the Queen of Denial, you will also see yourself. One hopes it will lead you to understand other people better and correct such tendencies in yourself.
I graduated from U-Mass with a BA in government in June of 1972, and in November I defeated an incumber state senator by nine votes. I serve fived two-year terms and retired undefeated in 1982. My colleagues thought I was hopelessly naïve (I was 26 when first elected) and a bit of a prig because I wouldn’t accept gifts or meals from lobbyists. I’d see them after the session trolling the halls for a dinner “sponsor.” Both parties, I might add. Six of my colleagues eventually served time. This book explains how it happened. None of them started out to be corrupt.
I also know how hard it is for a politician to admit he was wrong. The other party and the media stands ready to rip him (or her) to shreds. No one says, “How brave to admit he was wrong.”
I had a lung transplant in 2013. From 2017 until 2021, I worked part time at the VA interviewing veterans and writing their life stories, over 450 to date. I still volunteer. Two stories stand out because they were such wild and easily identifiable fabrications. One guy claimed he was drafted a 16, had 134 kills as a sniper in Vietnam, served in the Gulf War and later did two tours each in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also claimed that twice he had entered the oval office and insulted the then president, as though you could just stroll in.
The other claimed he was born in Egypt, was discovered in his teens, and toured the country with a famous rock band. But he was not the band member whose name he used.
I wondered who would believe such lies? This book answers that; the tellers believed their own stories.
My Marine DIs taught us to take responsibility for our actions. Though I know I have often fallen short, I try to live up to that. This book will help everyone take responsibility. And to understand those who won’t. I highly recommend it.
Top reviews from other countries
- CLIFFReviewed in Canada on January 2, 2024
5.0 out of 5 stars Thought Provoking
A very interesting discussion on how beliefs and decisions are arrived at and why we are prone to justify bad decisions and questionable beliefs. I learned some things about myself and others.
-
HoracioReviewed in Mexico on July 20, 2020
5.0 out of 5 stars Gran lectura!
Una lectura amena, llena de anécdotas interesantes y en las cuales uno se identifica muchas veces. Divulgación científica al alcance de las personas.
-
EduardoReviewed in Italy on October 19, 2020
5.0 out of 5 stars Fantastica lettura
Fantastica lettura
- AnonymReviewed in Germany on August 14, 2020
4.0 out of 5 stars Lots of examples for a useful concept
The authors present the concept of cognitive dissonance, which explains why people can do and justify incredibly dumb things. The concept is as simple as it is powerful and the actual explanation could be done in a single chapter or less. The rest of the book is essentially just an enumeration of examples. Some of these examples were interesting and surprising, others not. A lot of it could have been cut out, but I was not annoyed by it either. It is also worth noting that a lot of the examples for foolish believes are political. The authors are treading a thin line between informing and lecturing. Personally, I believe that they managed to stay on the former site, but people with different, especially conservative, believes may think differently - even though everything is reasonable, not dogmatic.
-
Paulo KnabbenReviewed in Brazil on April 11, 2018
5.0 out of 5 stars Excelente livro
Excelente livro. Traz muitas reflexões sobre como somos influenciados pelas nossas crenças e como nós criamos justificativas para que continuemos a acreditar nelas. Vale muito a pena ler.