"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal," John Fielder, a clinical psychologist... told the Senate committee last session.
It's the little things that expose a person. Note that Fielder said "I", rather than If a person...
"If I a person smokes marijuana, I the person may not be led to rob a store. But I the person can lose my his job and then be motivated to steal,"
If he, John Fielder, is capable of acting irresponsibly, he assumes that any person could be as irresponsible as he sees himself. True, virtually any person could be as irresponsible, yet it is Fielder that exposes himself. Apparently without pot prohibition he wouldn't know how to act responsibly.
Obviously his response to this would be something along the lines of: "Oh, but I wasn't speaking about myself, it is other people that could act irresponsibly."
My response: so that's why you spoke in the first person, because you were speaking about other people. Depends on the meaning of is, right?
I believe that what you describe is an acquired characteristic normally developed in an institutional setting, such as a public school.
Thinking in slogans results in chronic cognitive dissonance.