Title: The Nature And Meaning of Dogmatism by Milton Rokeach
Headings: The Nature And Meaning of Dogmatism
The Nature And Meaning of Dogmatism
Milton Rokeach
The Article in Full
GENERAL SETTING FOR A COGNITIVE REPRESENTATION OF DOGMATISM
A COGNITIVE REPRESENTATION OF DOGMATISM
DOGMATISM DISTINGUISHED FROM RIGIDITY
POSTULATES INVOLVING THE COGNITIVE STRUCTURE OF DOGMATISM
POSTULATES INVOLVING THE COGNITIVE CONTENT OF DOGMATISM
SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER THEORY AND RESEARCH ON AUTHORITARIANISM AND INTOLERANCE
SUMMARY
REFERENCES
Want To Study Psychology?
Find Programs Near You
Zip code
Recent Articles
Psychology As The Behaviorist Views It
Developmental Psychology Information and Resources
Daniel Kahneman On ‘Noise’
Know Someone Who Would Like To Read The Nature And Meaning of Dogmatism by Milton Rokeach?
Share This Page With Them

Content: With respect to the time perspective dimension, increasingly closed systems can be conceived as being organized in a relatively future-oriented or past-oriented direction rather than in terms of a more balanced orientation of past, present, and future. With regard to the content of dogmatism, while the specific content of both central and peripheral parts may vary from one particular ideological system to another, it is possible to specify that in general the formal content of the central part of the system, to the extent it is closed, has to do with absolute beliefs in and about positive and negative authority, either external or internal, and related beliefs representing attempts on the part of such authority to perpetuate itself. Furthermore, the central part can be conceived to provide a framework for the organization of other beliefs representing patterns of rejection and qualified acceptance of people in general according to their patterns of agreement and disagreement with the belief-disbelief system. DOGMATISM DISTINGUISHED FROM RIGIDITY
Before going on to elaborate further on our conceptual definition of dogmatism, it may be illuminating first to distinguish the construct of dogmatism in a general way from that of rigidity. Both dogmatism and rigidity refer to forms of resistance to change, but dogmatism is conceived to represent a relatively more intellectualized and abstract form than rigidity. Whereas dogmatism refers to total cognitive organizations of ideas and beliefs into relatively closed ideological systems, rigidity, when genotypically conceived, refers solely to the degree of isolation between regions (7, 12) or to a "property of a functional boundary which prevents communication between neighboring regions" (6, p. 157); when phenotypically conceived, rigidity is denned in terms of the way a person or animal attacks, solves, or learns specific tasks and problems (11). Thus, dogmatism is seen as a higher order and more complexly organized form of resistance to change. While dogmatism may well be hypothesized to lead to rigidity in solving specific problems, the converse is not necessarily the case. Rats, the feebleminded, and the brain-injured, for example, can be characterized as rigid (also compulsive, fixated, perseverative, inflexible) but hardly as dogmatic.