What do you think?
Rate this book
The Open and Closed Mind: Investigations into the Nature of Belief Systems and Personality Systems
2015 Reprint of 1960 Edition. Full Facsimile of the original edition. Not reproduced with Optical Recognition Software. Based on intensive studies this work probes deeply into the nature of prejudice and dogmatic thinking. In so doing, it sheds light on the processes by which man constructs and organizes his systems of belief and on the relation between an individual's patterns of belief and his underlying personality structure. It follows in the tradition of "Escape from Freedom" and "The Authoritarian Personality."
- GenresPsychology
464 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
5 people are currently reading
169 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
October 9, 2023
It is not the thought that's disastrous, it's not even the thought pattern; rather, it's the foundation and the framework that contains the seeds of destruction.
Rokeach's book contains a quantitative study conducted to analyze the working of open and closed minds. Presenting the synopsis of his research, he lays down the differences between as well as the origins of the two. The description of these two styles of thinking go far ahead and deeper than the usual way they are perceived in day to day conversations. My observation has been that we laud as open minded any person who agrees with or is happily willing to learn about MY beliefs and values. Whether he accepts or rejects what is being preached outside of my preferred domain is none of my concern. But Rokeach's open minded person is different - he is flexible in his thought and behavior in all areas of his life. This smart being who keeps knowledge and truth at the forefront and his beliefs secondary is ready to accept anything, or is at least not afraid of, what seems better than his current values.
The closed minded person on the other hand accepts or rejects on the basis of his 'fixed' beliefs. He enjoys security in the classification of people/society in in-groups and out-groups and tries hard to maintain the distinction. What follows is raising glory slogans in favor of the former and a vilifying narrative against the latter. His bent of mind in, let's say, religious sphere will be evident in emotional and social realms as well:
... persons who are high in ethnic prejudice or authoritarianism...are more rigid in their problem-solving behaviour, more concrete in their thinking, and more narrow in their grasp of a particular subject... and a greater tendency to be intolerant of ambiguity.
Rokeach hits the nail on the head by declaring 'threat' as the root reason behind the creation of the closed mind. This person views the world as an unfriendly place, where survival requires adequate defensing of oneself/one's group from dangers instigated by the hostile-other. Since there are no physical, immediate threats from wild beasts in our civilized world, psychological defenses are built to shield one's dearly-held beliefs and values from being challenged or worse, nullified. Anxiety, repression, rationalization, denial, projection, reaction formation and overidentification with authority become some of the commonly formed cognitive defenses.
The dogmatism evident thus in individuals can also be seen in groups or institutions, to describe which Rokeach uses Erasmus's term of "Law of Degeneracy":
...the thesis that all social institutions, including religious institutions, are driven by their desire to survive into programs of self-entrenchment and self-aggrandizement in the course of which their original faith and ideals are perverted and abandoned.
The book is largely a statistical representation of open and closed minds, with only first 2-3 chapters dedicated to explanation of the writer's findings. It can be read to examine one's own dominant style of thinking, and to re-evaluate it or to understand how fear is a crucial factor in the creation of authoritarianism and sectarianism.
Rokeach's book contains a quantitative study conducted to analyze the working of open and closed minds. Presenting the synopsis of his research, he lays down the differences between as well as the origins of the two. The description of these two styles of thinking go far ahead and deeper than the usual way they are perceived in day to day conversations. My observation has been that we laud as open minded any person who agrees with or is happily willing to learn about MY beliefs and values. Whether he accepts or rejects what is being preached outside of my preferred domain is none of my concern. But Rokeach's open minded person is different - he is flexible in his thought and behavior in all areas of his life. This smart being who keeps knowledge and truth at the forefront and his beliefs secondary is ready to accept anything, or is at least not afraid of, what seems better than his current values.
The closed minded person on the other hand accepts or rejects on the basis of his 'fixed' beliefs. He enjoys security in the classification of people/society in in-groups and out-groups and tries hard to maintain the distinction. What follows is raising glory slogans in favor of the former and a vilifying narrative against the latter. His bent of mind in, let's say, religious sphere will be evident in emotional and social realms as well:
... persons who are high in ethnic prejudice or authoritarianism...are more rigid in their problem-solving behaviour, more concrete in their thinking, and more narrow in their grasp of a particular subject... and a greater tendency to be intolerant of ambiguity.
Rokeach hits the nail on the head by declaring 'threat' as the root reason behind the creation of the closed mind. This person views the world as an unfriendly place, where survival requires adequate defensing of oneself/one's group from dangers instigated by the hostile-other. Since there are no physical, immediate threats from wild beasts in our civilized world, psychological defenses are built to shield one's dearly-held beliefs and values from being challenged or worse, nullified. Anxiety, repression, rationalization, denial, projection, reaction formation and overidentification with authority become some of the commonly formed cognitive defenses.
The dogmatism evident thus in individuals can also be seen in groups or institutions, to describe which Rokeach uses Erasmus's term of "Law of Degeneracy":
...the thesis that all social institutions, including religious institutions, are driven by their desire to survive into programs of self-entrenchment and self-aggrandizement in the course of which their original faith and ideals are perverted and abandoned.
The book is largely a statistical representation of open and closed minds, with only first 2-3 chapters dedicated to explanation of the writer's findings. It can be read to examine one's own dominant style of thinking, and to re-evaluate it or to understand how fear is a crucial factor in the creation of authoritarianism and sectarianism.
August 1, 2008
Interesting to read. It was written in 1960. It was influenced by the times. It read like an interesting psychology textbook.
July 16, 2010
Interesting, but not exciting to me.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews