Lovely and concise with a beautiful visual to boot.
There is a probably some value in drawing a contrast between Orwellian doublethink and F. Scott Fitzgerald's “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."
...if only to make sure we the people understand how seemingly small moral, ethical, and political compromises can lead to an osmosis into conflict (ala your visual) and even first-rate intelligence can delude itself into thinking it's needed to be able to function.
These dystopian mental gymnastics are a hallmark of crazy corporations with spineless management—perfect for chaotic companies clinging to dysfunction. It’s like they took Orwell’s doublethink as a playbook: shift blame, dodge accountability, and deny reality.
We’ve all seen the corporate versions of the Party’s tactics:
• “We value transparency” (while gaslighting employees).
• “We’re all in this together” (but accountability is always someone else’s job).
• “This is how it’s always been done” (when no one can recall why).
It’s wild how easily companies rewrite their own failures into ‘learning opportunities’ or ‘team challenges’—classic corporate doublethink in action.
- A taxi driver in a former soviet country once said something along the lines of "It is interesting that every country has a ministry of defense, not offense...". I wish I could remember the exact quote. I could not find it online either but others have posed the question as an interesting thought exercise.
- An interesting antithesis of doublethink when it comes to individuals, I recall a quote that comes to mind by Scott Fitzgerald, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.". It is an intellectual challenge and of high importance to always consider conflicting viewpoints at the same time.
Great article, I think 1984 and its lessons is too easily forgotten. Good to see somebody sharing these ideas, especially in the current political climate.
That being said I feel it is wise to temper what is shared in public, as some ideas might cause discomfort to the general population. Some concepts might be too complex for people to understand, and could lead to unfortunate consequences, and authors should think carefully before publishing.
One could go so far as to say that authors with this knowledge should help the Party in power to “structure” what ideas should be shared with the public, and which ideas and concepts we should be protecting them from.
Interesting first post, looking forward to reading more. Exactly the type of think I enjoy reading. I have never read 1984, it has never really appealed although there are references to it everywhere. I have actually heard of Doublethink but I did not know that it was Orwell who made it up in a novel.
Thanks Mark. It feels like 1984 somehow gets more and more relevant every year. I love that he was able to predict the complex state of the modern world so long ago. Not so dystopian anymore.
Brilliant first post! It finally clears so many of my questions with your name and newsletter title haha! 1984 is one of the few books that I've re-read time and time again with passages marked and personalized.
Would look forward to having a conversation about the same when the time is right but keep up the great work.
The name is sort of a play on the term itself. Doublethink is a concept that normally describes someone who is not thinking independently as it describes a state of holding two conflicting beliefs at once.
The conflict between this definition and the content of my newsletter (hopefully pretty rational) was something I thought was quite a nice juxtaposition.
Also, my surname is O'Brien -- so that's another element that I think helps tie things together.
Lovely and concise with a beautiful visual to boot.
There is a probably some value in drawing a contrast between Orwellian doublethink and F. Scott Fitzgerald's “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."
...if only to make sure we the people understand how seemingly small moral, ethical, and political compromises can lead to an osmosis into conflict (ala your visual) and even first-rate intelligence can delude itself into thinking it's needed to be able to function.
Love this link you’ve made here.
I was looking for that quote while writing the essay but couldn’t remember who said it and didn’t know it well enough from memory to find out.
Appreciate the insights here. Sounds like this would be a really interesting long form essay.
Surely, especially given the times and trends.
At any rate, your short essay and the visual were great provocations to exercise the mind. And I have been following the notes too.
Thanks for these. 🙏
Thanks for that, and I really do appreciate the ongoing support.
I like to engage with the people reading my writing and sharing my visuals because it helps me understand what you want and what resonates with you.
It’s also (more selfishly) just good fun speaking to likeminded people like yourself.
I have that Fitzgerald quote in a frame on my classroom wall.
These dystopian mental gymnastics are a hallmark of crazy corporations with spineless management—perfect for chaotic companies clinging to dysfunction. It’s like they took Orwell’s doublethink as a playbook: shift blame, dodge accountability, and deny reality.
We’ve all seen the corporate versions of the Party’s tactics:
• “We value transparency” (while gaslighting employees).
• “We’re all in this together” (but accountability is always someone else’s job).
• “This is how it’s always been done” (when no one can recall why).
It’s wild how easily companies rewrite their own failures into ‘learning opportunities’ or ‘team challenges’—classic corporate doublethink in action.
Well said Natasha.
It really is everywhere when you properly start to look for it.
Congrats on your first post Lewis!! 🙌🏻
Thanks Hannah, hope to be seeing a lot more from you here soon too! :)
Here for it! Excited to see what you are building :D
Great post! Loving the graphics also!
Appreciate that Dylan — this is the first of many more to come!
I’ll keep posting my daily visuals on Notes too :)
Looking forward to it😊
Brilliant thought process Lewis!
Thanks mate 🫶🏼
- A taxi driver in a former soviet country once said something along the lines of "It is interesting that every country has a ministry of defense, not offense...". I wish I could remember the exact quote. I could not find it online either but others have posed the question as an interesting thought exercise.
- An interesting antithesis of doublethink when it comes to individuals, I recall a quote that comes to mind by Scott Fitzgerald, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.". It is an intellectual challenge and of high importance to always consider conflicting viewpoints at the same time.
Interesting point Aram.
I don’t know the context of the Fitzgerald quote but it sounds like an acceptance that logic doesn’t always follow in the real world.
People lie. People betray. People deceive.
An acceptance that what logically follows isn’t always true, I think, does demonstrate a higher level of awareness.
I’m not sure how this correlates with intelligence, but it would be an interesting idea to study.
Cognitive Dissonance is at a higher than ever level.
And instead of making world a better place it just makes this whole thing a circus.
Yep. Everything is a circus.
Great article, I think 1984 and its lessons is too easily forgotten. Good to see somebody sharing these ideas, especially in the current political climate.
That being said I feel it is wise to temper what is shared in public, as some ideas might cause discomfort to the general population. Some concepts might be too complex for people to understand, and could lead to unfortunate consequences, and authors should think carefully before publishing.
One could go so far as to say that authors with this knowledge should help the Party in power to “structure” what ideas should be shared with the public, and which ideas and concepts we should be protecting them from.
Nice try O’Brien — I’m not falling for that one again!
Great read!
Appreciate that Max!
Lewis, I was delighted by your surprise and sudden ending of this post. It’s hard to have more to say yet stifle yourself for maximum effect. Bravo.
Thanks Ted, glad you picked up on that!
Interesting first post, looking forward to reading more. Exactly the type of think I enjoy reading. I have never read 1984, it has never really appealed although there are references to it everywhere. I have actually heard of Doublethink but I did not know that it was Orwell who made it up in a novel.
Thanks Mark. It feels like 1984 somehow gets more and more relevant every year. I love that he was able to predict the complex state of the modern world so long ago. Not so dystopian anymore.
I hate to love that he was so prescient. He should have named it 2024, unfortunately.
Yep. It all feels so relevant these days.
Brilliant first post! It finally clears so many of my questions with your name and newsletter title haha! 1984 is one of the few books that I've re-read time and time again with passages marked and personalized.
Would look forward to having a conversation about the same when the time is right but keep up the great work.
Thanks Prerit, I'm glad you like it.
The name is sort of a play on the term itself. Doublethink is a concept that normally describes someone who is not thinking independently as it describes a state of holding two conflicting beliefs at once.
The conflict between this definition and the content of my newsletter (hopefully pretty rational) was something I thought was quite a nice juxtaposition.
Also, my surname is O'Brien -- so that's another element that I think helps tie things together.