4 ms·

I had this failure to make a family member see a particular point of view. The person had taken a stance, that would be harmful to the family, but yet rational

I had this failure to make a family member see a particular point of view. The person had taken a stance, that would be harmful to the family, but yet rational arguments did not work out. The person had something to gain, I don't know what, by causing this harm, the person went ahead with that. Have you ever encountered this? If yes, does rational argument and persuation work with people who don't care?

munchbunny 10y ago
If they're trying to get something and are willing to screw others over for it, then you have to give them an easier way to get what they want. Maybe they actually want something else? Or maybe they can get the thing some less damaging way? If that all fails then you have to find other strings to pull. Figure out what currencies they care about (think social pressure) and see how you might be able to use them to help you make your case.
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  How Machiavelian. We're talking about people, not things. People are often inconsistent. You cannot reduce them to a simple stratagem without a risk of total mistake.
  - munchbunny 10y ago
    I didn't suggest a simple strategem, I suggested a way of thinking about how to dissuade someone who is willing to burn you or things or people you care about to gain something. How you implement what I said will vary from person to person. It can be Machiavellian if you're a student of the Jack Bauer school of persuasion, but for normal people it's just negotiation. Everybody has that ledger in their head when they make a decision but what's on that ledger can vary dramatically. If you want to both dissuade an irrational actor and keeping things civil, then you need to figure out what's on that ledger and whether you have a way of adjusting those items, maybe by offering a more palatable (to you) alternative, or by changing the perception of the costs/benefits, or by actually changing the costs/benefits, and so on.
    - orsenthil 10y ago
      The particular family member that I mention, did not come for any negotiation. They wanted to have something irrespective of the cost (even at the cost of health) to others in the family. It was a failed argument that I saw when rationalization was not helpful for my families welfare. I could not take it law either, as law does not cover many family scenarios.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
kibwen 10y ago
Rationality is relative. People do tend to make decisions based on reason, even seemingly irrational people, but 1) people possess differing information, from which two rational actors can draw contradictory yet individually-logical conclusions, and 2) everyone is susceptible to flawed logic. In the case of the latter, trying to directly "correct" someone's logic is often unwelcome (especially in a heated emotional context). Furthermore, sometimes people become invested in a particular decision for foregone reasons, possibly due to information that is secret or inexpressible (e.g. the degree of suffering one experiences from a mental illness, which is very hard to intuitively empathize with for people who are neurotypical). So the answer is no, rational argument doesn't always work. Sometimes the best that you can do is simply minimize harm to a relationship by not letting the argument escalate or letting anyone burn any bridges. Depending on context, sometimes it might even be worth yielding to a seemingly-irrational argument if it means preserving a valuable relationship (this should be done with caution, obviously). And sometimes things really are just irreconcilable (though hopefully not too often).
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  People often act according to heuristics rather than truly rational analysis. These heuristics are rational on their own, just misapplied at times.

munchbunny 10y ago

If they're trying to get something and are willing to screw others over for it, then you have to give them an easier way to get what they want. Maybe they actually want something else? Or maybe they can get the thing some less damaging way? If that all fails then you have to find other strings to pull. Figure out what currencies they care about (think social pressure) and see how you might be able to use them to help you make your case.

AstralStorm 10y ago
How Machiavelian. We're talking about people, not things. People are often inconsistent. You cannot reduce them to a simple stratagem without a risk of total mistake.
- munchbunny 10y ago
  I didn't suggest a simple strategem, I suggested a way of thinking about how to dissuade someone who is willing to burn you or things or people you care about to gain something. How you implement what I said will vary from person to person. It can be Machiavellian if you're a student of the Jack Bauer school of persuasion, but for normal people it's just negotiation. Everybody has that ledger in their head when they make a decision but what's on that ledger can vary dramatically. If you want to both dissuade an irrational actor and keeping things civil, then you need to figure out what's on that ledger and whether you have a way of adjusting those items, maybe by offering a more palatable (to you) alternative, or by changing the perception of the costs/benefits, or by actually changing the costs/benefits, and so on.
  - orsenthil 10y ago
    The particular family member that I mention, did not come for any negotiation. They wanted to have something irrespective of the cost (even at the cost of health) to others in the family. It was a failed argument that I saw when rationalization was not helpful for my families welfare. I could not take it law either, as law does not cover many family scenarios.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

kibwen 10y ago

Rationality is relative. People do tend to make decisions based on reason, even seemingly irrational people, but 1) people possess differing information, from which two rational actors can draw contradictory yet individually-logical conclusions, and 2) everyone is susceptible to flawed logic. In the case of the latter, trying to directly "correct" someone's logic is often unwelcome (especially in a heated emotional context). Furthermore, sometimes people become invested in a particular decision for foregone reasons, possibly due to information that is secret or inexpressible (e.g. the degree of suffering one experiences from a mental illness, which is very hard to intuitively empathize with for people who are neurotypical). So the answer is no, rational argument doesn't always work. Sometimes the best that you can do is simply minimize harm to a relationship by not letting the argument escalate or letting anyone burn any bridges. Depending on context, sometimes it might even be worth yielding to a seemingly-irrational argument if it means preserving a valuable relationship (this should be done with caution, obviously). And sometimes things really are just irreconcilable (though hopefully not too often).

AstralStorm 10y ago
People often act according to heuristics rather than truly rational analysis. These heuristics are rational on their own, just misapplied at times.