5 ms·

I think it's wrong to feign any reaction when others expect sincerity, but I also think this post causes more harm than good. Let me explain. First: Feigned su

by chroma 9y ago

I think it's wrong to feign any reaction when others expect sincerity, but I also think this post causes more harm than good. Let me explain. First: Feigned surprise is rare. I've never done it. I doubt the author has ever done it. What is far more common is genuine surprise. I've definitely been surprised by others' knowledge gaps. Heck, I've been surprised to discover my own ignorance in some areas. (eg: thinking, "How did I get this far in my career without knowing Python's defaultdict!?") Second: Without access to someone's internal mind-state, you cannot reliably tell the difference between a feigned response and a genuine one. You may think you're able to, but the main factors in such judgements are your own biases. This inaccuracy combined with the rarity of feigned responses means that people are far more likely to judge genuine surprise as feigned, and condemn someone who is acting in good faith (albeit impulsively). More useful advice would be: Don't get upset if someone is surprised you don't know something. If anything, take it as a compliment. It means they have high expectations of your level of technical knowledge. eg: I wouldn't be surprised to discover that my mother doesn't know to use git, but I would be surprised to discover that about a coworker.

scandox 9y ago
I think feigned surprise is exceptionally common. Your description of it makes it seem like a very thought out or premeditated behaviour. The kind of "feigning" the author is referring to is a reflex behaviour. If you confronted a feigner of surprise immediately afterwards they might be genuinely unable to say truthfully if they were really surprised or just reacted with surprise to satisfy an inner desire to assert the superiority of their knowledge. Such behaviours have strong roots in childhood and often a rational adult who has it brought to their attention will easily be able to never do it again. But it really is quite common in my experience.
- andreyf 9y ago
  Feigned reflexive behavior? That's some sociopathic shit. > Such behaviours have strong roots in childhood and often a rational adult who has it brought to their attention will easily be able to never do it again lol! no. I do agree that this rule is encouraging people to be ever-self-conscious and overrule their social reflexes and would be more accurately called "repress surprise".
  - pvg 9y ago
    People reflexively feign or exaggerate all sorts of emotions and reactions, it'd be stranger if they didn't.
    - andreyf 9y ago
      That's simply not what that word means, and tacking on exaggeration a totally different social behavior displayed by different people with different purposes. feign |fān| verb [with object] — pretend to be affected by (a feeling, state, or injury): she feigned nervousness.
      - scandox 9y ago
        The dictionary definition of a word is only its starting point. There are many levels of awareness that may be in operation when someone is said to "feign".
        andreyf 9y ago
        Words mean things. Feigned surprise is when you pretend to be surprised but are not really.
      - pvg 9y ago
        When someone you know tells you something important to them that you're uninterested in, you typically feign interest, possibly surprise without consciously thinking about it. Similarly, you can feign surprise at someone's ignorance not because you're really surprised but to berate them. It's also often done on autopilot, which is what the rule discussed in the post is about. I'm not sure what you mean by 'that's not what the word means'. You said 'reflexive feigned surprise' is 'sociopathic'. Reflexively representing some emotional state other than the one you exactly feel is a basic aspect of the way we behave and communicate. When someone's ability to do that is impaired, it's considered a handicap.
        andreyf 9y ago
- kurthr 9y ago
  What I find strange about your argument is that "a feigner of surprise immediately afterwards they might be genuinely unable to say truthfully if they were really surprised or just reacted with surprise to satisfy an inner desire", implies that you don't believe you can know whether others are feigning surprise or even really yourself! The best argument you have, from your experience, is that you often feign surprise, which I find a bit damning, if you then ascribe that behavior to others. I can't remember feigning surprise, but I definitely remember being horrified at being forced to argue about something rather elementary. If it doesn't affect me directly, I'm more likely to simply ignore the person's argument and go my way. edit: to be clear I get no satisfaction in seeing other people make obvious mistakes... it's almost physically painful.
  - scandox 9y ago
    Well I don't think people have as much "clean" access to their own behaviour and thoughts, as is generally thought. By thinking about our thoughts, we alter them. So that's why no-one can be crystal clear about their own motivations. I don't confess to feigning surprise in my comment. I believe it is very common, purely from observation of others - especially children and young adults.
    - kurthr 9y ago
      OK, you don't apply Bayesian priors to other's behavior based on your own internal knowledge. I'm not sure why you have much confidence in the analysis, then. See the second argument of chroma.
      - scandox 9y ago
        What's a Bayesian prior?
        StavrosK 9y ago
        I guess they mean "how likely it is that they know something just because you know it".
- chroma 9y ago
  I disagree with your belief that feigned surprise is common, but I don't want to get wrapped around that axle so I'll take another route. If what you call "feigned surprise" is a reflexive, unconscious behavior, then: 1. How can it be feigning/pretend? Perhaps it's not a habit one wishes to cultivate, but it's not fake. 2. How can we hold people morally responsible for it? It seems ill-advised to judge people for behaviors outside of their conscious control. After more reflection, I find my disagreement with the original post has increased. As I said originally, I think it's wrong to feign a reaction when others expect sincerity. If anything, the post pushes people to conceal their genuine reaction and consciously feign lack-of-surprise. I would much rather help people avoid misinterpreting a sincere response than compel people to conceal their sincere beliefs.
  - magicalist 9y ago
    A reaction can be quick enough to feel instinctual but still be an affectation. Just because a person has said "uh" to fill pauses in speech so often that it feels like it comes without thought doesn't mean it's a behavior outside of their concious control...it just means it's going to take some practice to stop doing it. And that's probably a good analogy because you seem to be reading some persecuting motives here. "Here's an easy viewpoint shift that, with practice, can help you be less alienating/condescending to some people" is not at all equivalent to "you're a bad person for this thing you have no control over".
wmf 9y ago
Don't get upset if someone is surprised you don't know something. I don't think this works, because a lot of noobs leave before the skin-thickening process finishes or even before they learn that they're supposed to grow a thicker skin.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
cirgue 9y ago
The problem isn't the surprise, it's showing that you are surprised. If you do so impulsively, you are being rude, whether you mean to be or not.
lkrubner 9y ago
For my mom, feigned surprise is one of her main communication styles, as I think it is for many people. This is closely related to the rhetorical device of "I just can't believe..." to express outrage about something which you can, in fact, believe. Eliezer Yudkowsky expresses that aspect of expression well: "The principle extends beyond physics. Have you ever caught yourself saying something like, "I just don't understand how a PhD physicist can believe in astrology?" Well, if you literally don't understand, this indicates a problem with your model of human psychology. Perhaps you are indignant - you wish to express strong moral disapproval. But if you literally don't understand, then your indignation is stopping you from coming to terms with reality. It shouldn't be hard to imagine how a PhD physicist ends up believing in astrology. People compartmentalize, enough said." http://lesswrong.com/lw/hs/think_like_reality/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/hs/think_like_reality/ My mom doesn't express indignation so much as she expresses surprise. She is hyper intelligent, but prefers to use surprise to talk about things in a certain way. Me: "A majority of college educated people in the Red States voted for Trump." My mom, surprised: "But how could they vote for Trump when they have such good educations?" Me: "From 1860 to 2008 the majority of all college educated people voted for the Republican candidate. It is normal for college educated people to vote for the Republican candidate. 2008 was the first year the pattern was broken." We've had exactly this same conversation many times before, so she's not really surprised by the information. But she feigns surprise as a stylistic choice. It's the personal manner in which she is most comfortable expressing herself. Likewise: Southerns who grew up watching televsion no longer speak with Southern accents. I introduce a friend to my mom and mom says "She doesn't sound Southern at all!" My mom is aware that the South has changed since the 1950s, but my mom prefers to feign surprise over this issue, every single time.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  "The principle extends beyond physics. Have you ever caught yourself saying something like, "I just don't understand how a PhD physicist can believe in astrology?" Well, if you literally don't understand, this indicates a problem with your model of human psychology. Perhaps you are indignant - you wish to express strong moral disapproval. But if you literally don't understand, then your indignation is stopping you from coming to terms with reality. It shouldn't be hard to imagine how a PhD physicist ends up believing in astrology. People compartmentalize, enough said." He seems not to understand that people don't always speak literally. I mean, I bet he does understand that, but he is feigning the misunderstanding because it is convenient to the point he is making.
orang_utang 9y ago
Exactly! I think it is more disrespectful to treat peers as toddlers who need to be shielded from any implied criticism.
scott_s 9y ago
If you've ever said "Really?" or "Seriously?" you've feigned surprise.
- Anthony-G 9y ago
  Or you've actually been surprised.
leephillips 9y ago
"Without access to someone's internal mind-state, you cannot reliably tell the difference between a feigned response and a genuine one." Orbicularis oculi.

by chroma 9y ago

scandox 9y ago

I think feigned surprise is exceptionally common. Your description of it makes it seem like a very thought out or premeditated behaviour. The kind of "feigning" the author is referring to is a reflex behaviour. If you confronted a feigner of surprise immediately afterwards they might be genuinely unable to say truthfully if they were really surprised or just reacted with surprise to satisfy an inner desire to assert the superiority of their knowledge. Such behaviours have strong roots in childhood and often a rational adult who has it brought to their attention will easily be able to never do it again. But it really is quite common in my experience.

andreyf 9y ago
Feigned reflexive behavior? That's some sociopathic shit. > Such behaviours have strong roots in childhood and often a rational adult who has it brought to their attention will easily be able to never do it again lol! no. I do agree that this rule is encouraging people to be ever-self-conscious and overrule their social reflexes and would be more accurately called "repress surprise".
- pvg 9y ago
  People reflexively feign or exaggerate all sorts of emotions and reactions, it'd be stranger if they didn't.
  - andreyf 9y ago
    That's simply not what that word means, and tacking on exaggeration a totally different social behavior displayed by different people with different purposes. feign |fān| verb [with object] — pretend to be affected by (a feeling, state, or injury): she feigned nervousness.
    - scandox 9y ago
      The dictionary definition of a word is only its starting point. There are many levels of awareness that may be in operation when someone is said to "feign".
      - andreyf 9y ago
        Words mean things. Feigned surprise is when you pretend to be surprised but are not really.
    - pvg 9y ago
      When someone you know tells you something important to them that you're uninterested in, you typically feign interest, possibly surprise without consciously thinking about it. Similarly, you can feign surprise at someone's ignorance not because you're really surprised but to berate them. It's also often done on autopilot, which is what the rule discussed in the post is about. I'm not sure what you mean by 'that's not what the word means'. You said 'reflexive feigned surprise' is 'sociopathic'. Reflexively representing some emotional state other than the one you exactly feel is a basic aspect of the way we behave and communicate. When someone's ability to do that is impaired, it's considered a handicap.
      - andreyf 9y ago
kurthr 9y ago
What I find strange about your argument is that "a feigner of surprise immediately afterwards they might be genuinely unable to say truthfully if they were really surprised or just reacted with surprise to satisfy an inner desire", implies that you don't believe you can know whether others are feigning surprise or even really yourself! The best argument you have, from your experience, is that you often feign surprise, which I find a bit damning, if you then ascribe that behavior to others. I can't remember feigning surprise, but I definitely remember being horrified at being forced to argue about something rather elementary. If it doesn't affect me directly, I'm more likely to simply ignore the person's argument and go my way. edit: to be clear I get no satisfaction in seeing other people make obvious mistakes... it's almost physically painful.
- scandox 9y ago
  Well I don't think people have as much "clean" access to their own behaviour and thoughts, as is generally thought. By thinking about our thoughts, we alter them. So that's why no-one can be crystal clear about their own motivations. I don't confess to feigning surprise in my comment. I believe it is very common, purely from observation of others - especially children and young adults.
  - kurthr 9y ago
    OK, you don't apply Bayesian priors to other's behavior based on your own internal knowledge. I'm not sure why you have much confidence in the analysis, then. See the second argument of chroma.
    - scandox 9y ago
      What's a Bayesian prior?
      - StavrosK 9y ago
        I guess they mean "how likely it is that they know something just because you know it".
chroma 9y ago
I disagree with your belief that feigned surprise is common, but I don't want to get wrapped around that axle so I'll take another route. If what you call "feigned surprise" is a reflexive, unconscious behavior, then: 1. How can it be feigning/pretend? Perhaps it's not a habit one wishes to cultivate, but it's not fake. 2. How can we hold people morally responsible for it? It seems ill-advised to judge people for behaviors outside of their conscious control. After more reflection, I find my disagreement with the original post has increased. As I said originally, I think it's wrong to feign a reaction when others expect sincerity. If anything, the post pushes people to conceal their genuine reaction and consciously feign lack-of-surprise. I would much rather help people avoid misinterpreting a sincere response than compel people to conceal their sincere beliefs.
- magicalist 9y ago
  A reaction can be quick enough to feel instinctual but still be an affectation. Just because a person has said "uh" to fill pauses in speech so often that it feels like it comes without thought doesn't mean it's a behavior outside of their concious control...it just means it's going to take some practice to stop doing it. And that's probably a good analogy because you seem to be reading some persecuting motives here. "Here's an easy viewpoint shift that, with practice, can help you be less alienating/condescending to some people" is not at all equivalent to "you're a bad person for this thing you have no control over".

wmf 9y ago

Don't get upset if someone is surprised you don't know something. I don't think this works, because a lot of noobs leave before the skin-thickening process finishes or even before they learn that they're supposed to grow a thicker skin.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

cirgue 9y ago

The problem isn't the surprise, it's showing that you are surprised. If you do so impulsively, you are being rude, whether you mean to be or not.

lkrubner 9y ago

For my mom, feigned surprise is one of her main communication styles, as I think it is for many people. This is closely related to the rhetorical device of "I just can't believe..." to express outrage about something which you can, in fact, believe. Eliezer Yudkowsky expresses that aspect of expression well: "The principle extends beyond physics. Have you ever caught yourself saying something like, "I just don't understand how a PhD physicist can believe in astrology?" Well, if you literally don't understand, this indicates a problem with your model of human psychology. Perhaps you are indignant - you wish to express strong moral disapproval. But if you literally don't understand, then your indignation is stopping you from coming to terms with reality. It shouldn't be hard to imagine how a PhD physicist ends up believing in astrology. People compartmentalize, enough said." http://lesswrong.com/lw/hs/think_like_reality/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/hs/think_like_reality/ My mom doesn't express indignation so much as she expresses surprise. She is hyper intelligent, but prefers to use surprise to talk about things in a certain way. Me: "A majority of college educated people in the Red States voted for Trump." My mom, surprised: "But how could they vote for Trump when they have such good educations?" Me: "From 1860 to 2008 the majority of all college educated people voted for the Republican candidate. It is normal for college educated people to vote for the Republican candidate. 2008 was the first year the pattern was broken." We've had exactly this same conversation many times before, so she's not really surprised by the information. But she feigns surprise as a stylistic choice. It's the personal manner in which she is most comfortable expressing herself. Likewise: Southerns who grew up watching televsion no longer speak with Southern accents. I introduce a friend to my mom and mom says "She doesn't sound Southern at all!" My mom is aware that the South has changed since the 1950s, but my mom prefers to feign surprise over this issue, every single time.

maxerickson 9y ago
"The principle extends beyond physics. Have you ever caught yourself saying something like, "I just don't understand how a PhD physicist can believe in astrology?" Well, if you literally don't understand, this indicates a problem with your model of human psychology. Perhaps you are indignant - you wish to express strong moral disapproval. But if you literally don't understand, then your indignation is stopping you from coming to terms with reality. It shouldn't be hard to imagine how a PhD physicist ends up believing in astrology. People compartmentalize, enough said." He seems not to understand that people don't always speak literally. I mean, I bet he does understand that, but he is feigning the misunderstanding because it is convenient to the point he is making.

orang_utang 9y ago

Exactly! I think it is more disrespectful to treat peers as toddlers who need to be shielded from any implied criticism.

scott_s 9y ago

If you've ever said "Really?" or "Seriously?" you've feigned surprise.

Anthony-G 9y ago
Or you've actually been surprised.

leephillips 9y ago

"Without access to someone's internal mind-state, you cannot reliably tell the difference between a feigned response and a genuine one." Orbicularis oculi.