4 ms·

I wonder if this is why people can become angry and aggressive when you accuse them of something. That would provide a natural defense against this kind of sugg

I wonder if this is why people can become angry and aggressive when you accuse them of something. That would provide a natural defense against this kind of suggestibility. It obviously wouldn't work with the modern police, because they would overpower you, but a few thousand years ago? I think it could've worked.

cplusplusfellow 3y ago
I can hear the police response now. “Why are you so angry about me accusing you of committing such a heinous crime that may even bear the death penalty if you didn’t do it?”
- Aerroon 3y ago
  "Because it's insulting that you think so lowly of me!"
  - Jalad 3y ago
    Wrong! "I'm invoking my right to remain silent, and I want my lawyer" Then you proceed to say nothing, no matter how much they're trying to provoke you. You also get a phone call https://youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
- tacocataco 3y ago
  "Stop resisting" as they do whatever they want to you.
Clubber 3y ago
>It obviously wouldn't work with the modern police, because they would overpower you Never go into a police interrogation without a lawyer regardless of innocence or guilt. That's our only counter today.
- j16sdiz 3y ago
  Only if you can get a lawyer. In many parts of the world, you can't.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
Timon3 3y ago
Thinking about anger as a defense makes a lot of sense to me. The cost to the individual whose opinion might be changed is pretty big: you will have to re-evaluate any thoughts that branches off the thought that is being challenged, so it might have a cascading effect. There needs to either be some natural stopping points (i.e. the thought graph is acyclic), or some other mechanism must keep us from going in circles.
- not_alexb 3y ago
  Not convincing in the general sense at least; I get high on learning new things that change my perspective entirely -- and that doesn't seem to be uncommon
  - Timon3 3y ago
    But is that literally always the case? Most of the time I also like learning new things, even things that change my perspective entirely. But that is when I am in the mood to actually engage with knowledge. There are other times when I'm much more annoyed by new knowledge going against what I already know. Let's say I'm doing my taxes, and my tax program has a popup "here are 804 changes to the tax code from last year", I will not be happy about having to learn that. Maybe this difference is caused by the perceived usefulness of new information. If there is potential for my new perspective to greatly help me, it might be worth exploring more than if I can't see any way for it to be productive.
stubish 3y ago
I think this is the mind defending its worldview, in the same way as people react when you question or present evidence that contradicts. And yes, it is a natural defense against changing your mind and can be rationalized as a survival strategy (my worldview has kept me alive and healthy so far, and adjusting it is increasing risk).

cplusplusfellow 3y ago

I can hear the police response now. “Why are you so angry about me accusing you of committing such a heinous crime that may even bear the death penalty if you didn’t do it?”

Aerroon 3y ago
"Because it's insulting that you think so lowly of me!"
- Jalad 3y ago
  Wrong! "I'm invoking my right to remain silent, and I want my lawyer" Then you proceed to say nothing, no matter how much they're trying to provoke you. You also get a phone call https://youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
tacocataco 3y ago
"Stop resisting" as they do whatever they want to you.

Clubber 3y ago

>It obviously wouldn't work with the modern police, because they would overpower you Never go into a police interrogation without a lawyer regardless of innocence or guilt. That's our only counter today.

j16sdiz 3y ago
Only if you can get a lawyer. In many parts of the world, you can't.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

Timon3 3y ago

Thinking about anger as a defense makes a lot of sense to me. The cost to the individual whose opinion might be changed is pretty big: you will have to re-evaluate any thoughts that branches off the thought that is being challenged, so it might have a cascading effect. There needs to either be some natural stopping points (i.e. the thought graph is acyclic), or some other mechanism must keep us from going in circles.

not_alexb 3y ago
Not convincing in the general sense at least; I get high on learning new things that change my perspective entirely -- and that doesn't seem to be uncommon
- Timon3 3y ago
  But is that literally always the case? Most of the time I also like learning new things, even things that change my perspective entirely. But that is when I am in the mood to actually engage with knowledge. There are other times when I'm much more annoyed by new knowledge going against what I already know. Let's say I'm doing my taxes, and my tax program has a popup "here are 804 changes to the tax code from last year", I will not be happy about having to learn that. Maybe this difference is caused by the perceived usefulness of new information. If there is potential for my new perspective to greatly help me, it might be worth exploring more than if I can't see any way for it to be productive.

stubish 3y ago

I think this is the mind defending its worldview, in the same way as people react when you question or present evidence that contradicts. And yes, it is a natural defense against changing your mind and can be rationalized as a survival strategy (my worldview has kept me alive and healthy so far, and adjusting it is increasing risk).