5 ms·

Lovely. A psychological study on how to manipulate people into supporting your social agenda. How about using, you know, reason? Treating them like adults? Giv

by ccleve 6y ago

Lovely. A psychological study on how to manipulate people into supporting your social agenda. How about using, you know, reason? Treating them like adults? Give them pros and cons so they can make a rational decision?

ncphillips 6y ago
Unfortunately people don’t work that way. People are highly influenced by the way things are presented. There are numerous examples of this. See Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman for a good primer.
- ewzimm 6y ago
  Is this inherent to all people, or is behavior reinforced by the way the problem is presented? Those first two sentences seem to indicate different possibilities. This article frames motivation as based on either a positive or negative self-image, but it doesn't question whether motivation based on self-image is the best option. I haven't seen any evidence that self-image is universally the primary motivation across cultures, so the degree to which people are motivated by it would seem to be influenced by the way things are presented. Reason is one other potential motivation that could be considered a special case of acting in accordance with perceived transcendent principles. Loyalty to others or aspirations for collective achievements are other motivations that are not always centered on self-image. These aren't inherently more valuable, and they can be just as positive or negative as self-image, but they present alternatives.
njsubedi 6y ago
Not everyone can take rational decisions. Even if they are in a position to take rational decisions, external factors like greed, pride, social pressure and situation hugely affect those decisions. For example, if there's a plantation programme in the community, and my buddies want me to hang out for a drink at the same time, I will most likely decide to go to the plantation programme, but the buddies will make me hang out with them as much as they can.
pdamoc 6y ago
We are more animal than human. In other words, our emotional brain is far larger and far faster than the neocortex. There are far fewer "adults" than you might think. As one spiritual master said: "Most people tell you they want to get out of kindergarten, but don’t believe them. Don’t believe them! All they want you to do is to mend their broken toys. “Give me back my wife. Give me back my job. Give me back my money. Give me back my reputation, my success.” This is what they want; they want their toys replaced. That’s all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that, that people don’t really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful."
- throwaway316943 6y ago
  Everyone is capable of growing into an “adult”. There are a lot of perverse incentives in our society that prevent this. There’s a lot of stuff that needs to be undone before we can all continue to move forward.
Kednicma 6y ago
Because we'd pull out the guillotine. We know exactly what happens with populist rationalist movements. This might not be a morally bad thing, or an overall net negative in terms of utility; when politicians are bad enough, executing them really does have an affect on the upper class. But it's seditious, which is why folks don't want to talk about it; they don't want to be arrested nor first up against the wall when the revolution comes. The amount of abuse that the upper class has committed upon the typical person is so large that there's no way to peacefully empower them anymore. 10% of the USA is impoverished, 30% cannot afford to own housing, 40% are financially insecure, and our Pareto 80/20 distribution of wealth has slid over the past two decades to nearly 90/10 [0]. Honestly, that last number doesn't stress it enough: Fewer than a thousand people have over half the wealth of the USA [1] and it gets worse with each recession. Rationally, how would you correct this situation? The guillotine crowd has a solution, and the only cons are that it's illegal and that it can get out of control quite quickly. Meanwhile, the closest thing to a mainstream political solution comes from Bernie and the Democratic Socialists, and their reforms are widely unpopular among the political establishment. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... [1] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/mar/10/michael-mo...
renewiltord 6y ago
I mean, why don't you do that, and other people will try other things and whoever wins in the marketplace of ideas wins.
- Nursie 6y ago
  I guess the issue is that, like with evolution, the marketplace of ideas does not necessarily reward the ideas that people would think of as "best", but selects for fitness in other ways.
  - c22 6y ago
    The "marketplace of ideas" cannot reward what is "best" since disparate people have differing ideas of what best means. Indeed, the marketplace "solves" this problem precisely by invoking another fitness function, a compromise that is predicated by a certain cultural tension and virtually guaranteed to produce results that appear sub-par from every perspective.
Nursie 6y ago
> Give them pros and cons so they can make a rational decision? If that actually worked we wouldn't be having this conversation. People, particularly in large groups, use emotion, tribalism and ego protection over reason. If reason and fact worked well to change minds, we wouldn't have idiots "rolling coal".
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  This is actually a pretty naturalistic explanation and probably mostly wrong. I think people quickly see that you perceive them as idiots and then the ego does indeed run its course. and rightly so.
  - Nursie 6y ago
    So the fact that I see someone as an idiot for "rolling coal" is responsible for the behaviour in the first place? Yeah that totally works.
- throwaway316943 6y ago
  People “roll coal” because they perceive your ham handed attempts at reasoning with them as an attempt to force them into a sudden change that will probably have some immediate negative consequences for them. It’s a defensive reaction provoked by attacking them.
  - skrap 6y ago
    I don't think that's the full picture. I think people "roll coal" because they get pleasure from causing frustration by their actions. It's all about "owning the libs" or similar. I drive a prius, and several times I have seen coal rollers cross several lanes of traffic to sit in front of me with their stacks spewing. They don't know anything about me other than the brand of car I choose, but it's enough to make them go out of their way. It's got to be a positive reinforcement mechanism. I think the reason why you can't have a rational discussion is that it will play directly into this cycle! Give someone a choice between an uncomfortable analysis of their own behavior versus a pleasurable peel out with yet another frustrated do-gooder in their wake, and they'll choose the latter each time. Honestly I think they'll just have to get bored before they stop.

by ccleve 6y ago

ncphillips 6y ago

Unfortunately people don’t work that way. People are highly influenced by the way things are presented. There are numerous examples of this. See Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman for a good primer.

ewzimm 6y ago
Is this inherent to all people, or is behavior reinforced by the way the problem is presented? Those first two sentences seem to indicate different possibilities. This article frames motivation as based on either a positive or negative self-image, but it doesn't question whether motivation based on self-image is the best option. I haven't seen any evidence that self-image is universally the primary motivation across cultures, so the degree to which people are motivated by it would seem to be influenced by the way things are presented. Reason is one other potential motivation that could be considered a special case of acting in accordance with perceived transcendent principles. Loyalty to others or aspirations for collective achievements are other motivations that are not always centered on self-image. These aren't inherently more valuable, and they can be just as positive or negative as self-image, but they present alternatives.

njsubedi 6y ago

Not everyone can take rational decisions. Even if they are in a position to take rational decisions, external factors like greed, pride, social pressure and situation hugely affect those decisions. For example, if there's a plantation programme in the community, and my buddies want me to hang out for a drink at the same time, I will most likely decide to go to the plantation programme, but the buddies will make me hang out with them as much as they can.

pdamoc 6y ago

We are more animal than human. In other words, our emotional brain is far larger and far faster than the neocortex. There are far fewer "adults" than you might think. As one spiritual master said: "Most people tell you they want to get out of kindergarten, but don’t believe them. Don’t believe them! All they want you to do is to mend their broken toys. “Give me back my wife. Give me back my job. Give me back my money. Give me back my reputation, my success.” This is what they want; they want their toys replaced. That’s all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that, that people don’t really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful."

throwaway316943 6y ago
Everyone is capable of growing into an “adult”. There are a lot of perverse incentives in our society that prevent this. There’s a lot of stuff that needs to be undone before we can all continue to move forward.

Kednicma 6y ago

Because we'd pull out the guillotine. We know exactly what happens with populist rationalist movements. This might not be a morally bad thing, or an overall net negative in terms of utility; when politicians are bad enough, executing them really does have an affect on the upper class. But it's seditious, which is why folks don't want to talk about it; they don't want to be arrested nor first up against the wall when the revolution comes. The amount of abuse that the upper class has committed upon the typical person is so large that there's no way to peacefully empower them anymore. 10% of the USA is impoverished, 30% cannot afford to own housing, 40% are financially insecure, and our Pareto 80/20 distribution of wealth has slid over the past two decades to nearly 90/10 [0]. Honestly, that last number doesn't stress it enough: Fewer than a thousand people have over half the wealth of the USA [1] and it gets worse with each recession. Rationally, how would you correct this situation? The guillotine crowd has a solution, and the only cons are that it's illegal and that it can get out of control quite quickly. Meanwhile, the closest thing to a mainstream political solution comes from Bernie and the Democratic Socialists, and their reforms are widely unpopular among the political establishment. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... [1] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/mar/10/michael-mo...

renewiltord 6y ago

I mean, why don't you do that, and other people will try other things and whoever wins in the marketplace of ideas wins.

Nursie 6y ago
I guess the issue is that, like with evolution, the marketplace of ideas does not necessarily reward the ideas that people would think of as "best", but selects for fitness in other ways.
- c22 6y ago
  The "marketplace of ideas" cannot reward what is "best" since disparate people have differing ideas of what best means. Indeed, the marketplace "solves" this problem precisely by invoking another fitness function, a compromise that is predicated by a certain cultural tension and virtually guaranteed to produce results that appear sub-par from every perspective.

Nursie 6y ago

> Give them pros and cons so they can make a rational decision? If that actually worked we wouldn't be having this conversation. People, particularly in large groups, use emotion, tribalism and ego protection over reason. If reason and fact worked well to change minds, we wouldn't have idiots "rolling coal".

raxxorrax 6y ago
This is actually a pretty naturalistic explanation and probably mostly wrong. I think people quickly see that you perceive them as idiots and then the ego does indeed run its course. and rightly so.
- Nursie 6y ago
  So the fact that I see someone as an idiot for "rolling coal" is responsible for the behaviour in the first place? Yeah that totally works.
throwaway316943 6y ago
People “roll coal” because they perceive your ham handed attempts at reasoning with them as an attempt to force them into a sudden change that will probably have some immediate negative consequences for them. It’s a defensive reaction provoked by attacking them.
- skrap 6y ago
  I don't think that's the full picture. I think people "roll coal" because they get pleasure from causing frustration by their actions. It's all about "owning the libs" or similar. I drive a prius, and several times I have seen coal rollers cross several lanes of traffic to sit in front of me with their stacks spewing. They don't know anything about me other than the brand of car I choose, but it's enough to make them go out of their way. It's got to be a positive reinforcement mechanism. I think the reason why you can't have a rational discussion is that it will play directly into this cycle! Give someone a choice between an uncomfortable analysis of their own behavior versus a pleasurable peel out with yet another frustrated do-gooder in their wake, and they'll choose the latter each time. Honestly I think they'll just have to get bored before they stop.