3 ms·
I think the nature of the conformity that he's putting forward is problematic, though. I don't agree that there is one right way to act, the one described on hi
by theoh 7y ago
I think the nature of the conformity that he's putting forward is problematic, though. I don't agree that there is one right way to act, the one described on his site. There are many styles, but all he offers is conventionality.
In an interview he says: "When I look back on some of the most likable people I’ve met, they were using the same core social skills we all do, but just executing on everything at a more polished, consistent level."
Likableness is not about "polished, consistent" execution of some social techniques. It has to do with authenticity, a sense of humour, intellectual strengths, etc. The idea that the most likeable people are likeable because they are skilled performers sounds like a normalisation of superficial narcissistic behaviour.
It's all a bit humourless and robotic. "Pod person" territory. Social interaction as technical performance is a way of looking at it that most people would find unsettling.
- newen 7y agoWhat you see as authenticity and a good sense of humor, he sees as skilled performance. And I don't really disagree with him there. Maybe it's because you buy into their "authenticity". Or maybe it's because I don't really get social behavior.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dorgo 7y agoThere are "naturals", who are authentic and have a good sense of humor without doing anything for it. Everybody else needs more work/practice to get there. Basically, fake "authenticity" until you are "authentic".
- theoh 7y agoFWIW, my reference to narcissism relates to the ideas of the true (deep) and false (superficial) self discussed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_self_and_false_self https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_self_and_false_self There isn't a hard scientific consensus about the dynamics of narcissism. It's kind of at the intellectual stage of being a "code smell" that many very serious people have learned to detect from bitter personal experience.
- newen 7y agoIn addition to there being no scientific consensus on narcissism, and it having multiple meanings, another problem with the word is that it has become a reddit/internet meme, where you have random people arbitrarily accusing people of being narcissistic. Because of this, it's starting to lose any meaning at least in general topic internet forums.
- theoh 7y agoOK, I know it's a 'bad' word to use. In my innocence, I think I can use it to invoke the rich, complex psychoanalytical meanings of the word. Serious conversation is what we do here, right? But more seriously, I don't care how diluted the word has become. It names a very recognizable phenomenon, one that we have a problem with in the current culture, but which isn't new. If you care about engaging with that phenomenon (and typically, if you do, you don't have a choice in the matter) then the professional use of the term becomes the only meaning that has significant value.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- laughinghan 7y agoI haven't seen this interview; you could be right that he's way overselling how Correct(TM) his advice is. But from what I've seen, I think you're reading too much into it all. You're right that all he offers is conventionality, that's the whole point, the site describes social conventions. That doesn't mean he's saying you're going to die friendless and alone if you ever dare to break the mold. The quote you cite just sounds to me like he's saying here's what people do, and for people who do it really well, it really works.