What type of reasoning is being used when someone dismisses a minor theft by claiming it doesn't really matter?

The reasoning involved when someone dismisses a minor theft by claiming it doesn't really matter aligns with rationalization. This process entails justifying an action or belief to make it appear acceptable, often by downplaying its significance. In this case, the individual minimizes the impact or importance of the theft in order to alleviate any feelings of guilt or to make the behavior seem more justifiable to themselves or others.

Rationalization serves as a defense mechanism where a person creates excuses or explanations that sound logical but may not hold up under scrutiny. By asserting that the theft is inconsequential, the individual attempts to ease any moral conflict associated with the act, allowing them to maintain a more positive self-image while dismissing the implications of the theft.

Understanding rationalization is key in recognizing how people use cognitive distortions to cope with or justify their actions, actions that may otherwise conflict with their moral or ethical beliefs.