When is fits its "anything-but-Jewish-nationalism" framework.
Like here, in a review of an academic presentation on “Irving Janis’ Groupthink and the Sanhedrin of Ancient Israel” by Eliezer Schnall, a psychologist at Yeshiva University, and his student, Michael Greenberg. Presented at the American Psychological Association’s Annual Convention in Washington on Aug. 7.
Entitled Thinking Cap: Preventing Groupthink, the practices of the Sanhedrin, the judicial and legislative body of ancient Israel, are highlighted and compared to Groupthink.
For example:
To prevent leaders from favoring their own ideas and discouraging dissent leadership in the Sanhedrin was shared, ensuring that different viewpoints were heard. Junior members always spoke before senior ones to prevent them from tailoring their opinions to suit their superiors...To ensure that the group did not become too insular, members were required to consult outside experts.
Or
...the Sanhedrin required that in certain instances, a final verdict be postponed a day after agreement was reached. In capital cases, the Sandehrin went so far as to acquit a defendant if there was a unanimous guilty verdict from its 70 members. The absence of dissension was perceived as evidence that group conformity was operating.
But one cannot detach the paradigm of the Sanhedrin totally from its specific Jewish national role.
^
Posts
