ManipuLation

[Luminous]

I have no other concerns but: Are you manipulating a person into the right thing? How would one know that? Even if you have person's best interest at heart, you could still be wrong about the right thing.

This is always going to be an issue. What the right thing is differs greatly among people.

 

[Lib]

This is always going to be an issue. What the right thing is differs greatly among people.

That's why I support the informed choice. Sometimes I wonder how society would look like if parents were teaching their kids not to take orders but rather cooperate of their own accord. My parents taught me that way (well, only partially) and I wouldn't call myself irresponsible or selfish, the same applies to my sister.

 

[1487610420]

That's why I support the informed choice. Sometimes I wonder how society would look like if parents were teaching their kids not to take orders but rather cooperate of their own accord. My parents taught me that way (well, only partially) and I wouldn't call myself irresponsible or selfish, the same applies to my sister.

ib4 genetically locked procreation requiring PhD level child rearing unlocking.

 

[Coriolis]

Seriously how do you not? You're free to disagree of course, that's entirely up to you. But if you're looking for a more in depth debate on it right now, I'm afraid you're liable to be disappointed as I'm not getting into in depth debates right now. ^_^ You're free to state your case, and I'll respond when I'm more inclined/have more time to get into it if you like. But if you're putting the onus on me to explain my position, rather than you explaining yours. Well it's largely a matter of whether you'd like to go first or not. If not....You're gonna be waiting at least through tomorrow for me to get back with you.

I make a distinction between manipulation and threats, with the latter being overt and the former more hidden and deceitful. I would not, for instance, consider a robber holding you at gunpoint and demanding your wallet to be manipulating, as it is quite obvious to you what is going on, even if you succumb to the coercion out of a basic survival instinct. The kid having a temper tantrum is doing the same thing.

I have no other concerns but: Are you manipulating a person into the right thing? How would one know that? Even if you have person's best interest at heart, you could still be wrong about the right thing.

This is always a risk, which is why I do it only if the siituation seems urgent and I have exhausted other approaches.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I have no other concerns but: Are you manipulating a person into the right thing? How would one know that? Even if you have person's best interest at heart, you could still be wrong about the right thing.

To tell you the truth for me this is logic of "analysis paralysis" in which people overindulge too much in modern times. Right thing is evidently everything that will pretty obviously reduce chances of: injuries, damage, malfunction, sickness, lawsuits, pollution, armed conflict ... etc. Most decisions in life aren't really morally gray.

 

[Lib]

To tell you the truth for me this is logic of "analysis paralysis" in which people overindulge too much in modern times. Right thing is evidently everything that will pretty obviously reduce chances of: injuries, damage, malfunction, sickness, lawsuits, pollution, armed conflict ... etc. Most decisions in life aren't really morally gray.

Yes, but turning people into puppets is not exactly helping the cause. If the majority is well-informed and taught to be responsible they tend do the right thing.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Yes, but turning people into puppets is not exactly helping the cause. If the majority is well-informed and taught to be responsible they tend do the right thing.

One thing is mass turning people into puppets and another is to push a group of people into more constructive direction during a difficult situation. In ideal world your words work but world is pretty far from that.

 

[Lib]

One thing is mass turning people into puppets and another is to push a group of people into more constructive direction during a difficult situation. In ideal world your words work but world is pretty far from that.

"Difficult situation". How about keeping people well-informed to prevent the difficult situations in the first place? Lies only lead to more lies.

 

[Virtual ghost]

"Difficult situation". How about keeping people well-informed to prevent the difficult situations in the first place? Lies only lead to more lies.

In ideal world that works but in reality it often doesn't. Since the general/global education level isn't in sync with our technological level.
Plus I said nothing about lying, talking people into something isn't lying, as I said lying and manipulation are for me two different things. (that can come in the same package in certain situations)



My grandfather when he died had nothing more than 4 grades of school since he was a war zone child like myself. However even with that he was evidently overachiever in things he did since he wasn't dumb but uneducated. Therefore when you have plenty of people who had this situation someone educated has to take the lead and make promises since there is no time to fully replace and perfectly fix everything. Since years or perhaps decades were lost in wars or dictatorships. Therefore this person may not have the time to explain everyone every detail and if there is plenty of ruins it is perhaps better that people don't focus on too abstract and advanced scientific things until order is fully rebuilt. However at this point huge parts of the world are like this or close to this and you can't expect that people will fully grasp what is 30 steps ahead. Especially if they weren't trained to think this way, since natural human instincts are focused on short term logic.


I am talking about manipulation in rhetoric not manipulation in facts, if you get straight question you should have the most honest answer. But there is no need to spill everything you got at people. I have chopped people to pieces even if I was telling the truth, since people simply aren't fully rational being and therefore it is important to know when the time is right for something, what is evidently a manipulation.



I know how totalitarian my words may sound.

 

[Lib]

In ideal world that works but in reality it often doesn't. Since the general/global education level isn't in sync with our technological level.
Plus I said nothing about lying, talking people into something isn't lying, as I said lying and manipulation are for me two different things. (that can come in the same package in certain situations)

My grandfather when he died had nothing more than 4 grades of school since he was a war zone child like myself. However even with that he was evidently overachiever in things he did since he wasn't dumb but uneducated. Therefore when you have plenty of people who had this situation someone educated has to take the lead and make promises since there is no time to fully replace and perfectly fix everything. Since years or perhaps decades were lost in wars or dictatorships. Therefore this person may not have the time to explain everyone every detail and if there is plenty of ruins it is perhaps better that people don't focus on too abstract and advanced scientific things until order is fully rebuilt. However at this point huge parts of the world are like this or close to this and you can't expect that people will fully grasp what is 30 steps ahead. Especially if they weren't trained to think this way, since natural human instincts are focused on short term logic.
I am talking about manipulation in rhetoric not manipulation in facts, if you get straight question you should have the most honest answer. But there is no need to spill everything you got at people. I have chopped people to pieces even if I was telling the truth, since people simply aren't fully rational being and therefore it is important to know when the time is right for something, what is evidently a manipulation.

I know how totalitarian my words may sound.

Uneducated doesn't mean misinformed. It's more about the way people think, whether they look for knowledge and understanding before acting or not. It's obvious that different personalities would have different preferences but everybody could be taught to be proactive.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Uneducated doesn't mean misinformed. It's more about the way people think, whether they look for knowledge and understanding before acting or not. It's obvious that different personalities would have different preferences but everybody could be taught to be proactive.

In ideal circumstances yes but just to get to the point that you can exchange ideas freely you generally need to invest fair amount of effort. Not to mention that information means nothing if people don't have the knowledge (or even time) to fully understand what you are offering them, especially since it takes years of hard work to truly grasp certain complex concepts. Also if you push all of this too fast you may scare away the people and they will decide to replace you with some nonsense since it makes them feel safe. To find evidences of this you don't need to look further away than this forum.


For thousands of years philosophers are systematically horrified with human nature, since it simply isn't ideal.

 

[Lib]

In ideal circumstances yes but just to get to the point that you can exchange ideas freely you generally need to invest fair amount of effort. Not to mention that information means nothing if people don't have the knowledge (or even time) to fully understand what you are offering them, especially since it takes years of hard work to truly grasp certain complex concepts. Also if you push all of this too fast you may scare away the people and they will decide to replace you with some nonsense since it makes them feel safe. To find evidences of this you don't need to look further away than this forum.

For thousands of years philosophers are systematically horrified with human nature, since it simply isn't ideal.

What you describe here is the antithesis of democracy. Human nature is horrifying because we are treated in such a way, we are lied to and exploited. Otherwise, you simply has no explanation for the success of the Nordic model. It also shows a part of the human nature.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What you describe here is the antithesis of democracy. Human nature is horrifying because we are treated in such a way, we are lied to and exploited. Otherwise, you simply has no explanation for the success of the Nordic model. It also shows a part of the human nature.

Nordic model is part of Human nature, since Nordic people are humans. However getting to that point is evidently a chore and the region had plenty of luck when it comes to skipping wars that truly undo everything. I am not saying that this can't or shouldn't be build everywhere, I am simply saying that this will require plenty of hard work as well as plenty of pragmatism.


On the other hand even in Nordic countries refuges are strengthening nationalism and return of Russia is rising military spending from what I saw. Being pure, good and transparent in good times isn't that hard, but real question is what happens when the times aren't good.

 

[Lib]

Nordic model is part of Human nature, since Nordic people are humans. However getting to that point is evidently a chore and the region had plenty of luck when it comes to skipping wars that truly undo everything. I am not saying that this can't or shouldn't be build everywhere, I am simply saying that this will require plenty of hard work as well as plenty of pragmatism.

On the other hand even in Nordic countries refuges are strengthening nationalism and return of Russia is rising military spending from what I saw. Being pure, good and transparent in good times isn't that hard, but real question is what happens when the times aren't good.

As I said:

What you describe here is the antithesis of democracy. Human nature is horrifying because we are treated in such a way, we are lied to and exploited.

Nordic people have the potential to turn into something else when they are treated in the way you describe. Hate when people keep repeating that intolerance to the different is caused by the fact that people are bad. It's the ignorance that causes it! That's why you don't see a lot of smart racists, unless they are having a psychopathic agenda to take advantage of people's ignorance. Racists are dumb. And who is responsible for the growing ignorance and delusions of the masses? The ones who manipulate them.

 

[Virtual ghost]

As I said:

Nordic people have the potential to turn into something else when they are treated in the way you describe. Hate when people keep repeating that intolerance to the different is caused by the fact that people are bad. It's the ignorance that causes it! That's why you don't see a lot of smart racists, unless they are having a psychopathic agenda to take advantage of people's ignorance. Racists are dumb. And who is responsible for the growing ignorance and delusions of the masses? The ones who manipulate them.

Correct I would say.

However autistic or moralistic presentation of truth can look inferior to well packed lie. That is why I claim that this fight can't be won without paying attention to rhetoric and that is to some degree manipulation.

 

[Lib]

Correct I would say.

However autistic or moralistic presentation of truth can look inferior to well packed lie. That is why I claim that this fight can't be won without paying attention to rhetoric and that is to some degree manipulation.

No. Truth is the best argument because it has no logical flaws. It's neither moralistic nor autistic.

 

[Virtual ghost]

No. Truth is the best argument because it has no logical flaws.

Do you even understand that I am not talking about truth/lie here. Truth is the best thing but how you preset it makes a huge difference, to me this also stupid but to most people presentation is huge thing.


Truth can be presented in a number of ways: you can do it linearly, you can go from the consequences towards cause, you can do it naked or properly dressed, you can take arguments of your opponents and directly go fact by fact where they did wrong, you can make budget in how much you are willing to invest in spreading what is truly "objective factual truth", ... and the other 200 ways to do it.


And that is the layer that you are skipping from the start. You can speak the truth 100% and still be a manipulator.

 

[Lib]

Do you even understand that I am not talking about truth/lie here. Truth is the best thing but how you preset it makes a huge difference, to me this also stupid but to most people presentation is huge thing.

Truth can be presented in a number of ways: you can do it linearly, you can go from the consequences towards cause, you can do it naked or properly dressed, you can take arguments of your opponents and directly go fact by fact where they did wrong, you can make budget in how much you are willing to invest in spreading what is truly "objective factual truth", ... and the other 200 ways to do it.

And that is the layer that you are skipping from the start. You can speak the truth 100% and still be a manipulator.

I agree with this, but got the impression that you're trying to say something else. Personally, if I don't find an idea valuable, couldn't care less about the way it was presented.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I agree with this, but got the impression that you're trying to say something else. Personally, if I don't find an idea valuable, couldn't care less about the way it was presented.

And that is the mistake of pretty much every truth seeker out there. Which is exactly why we are where we are.


The world doesn't revolve around you (or me for that matter). Therefore in order to have the truth known you need to spread it and that is a science on it's own. It isn't the same if you are giving the truth to 10 people a day on the fly or you can reach thousands in a professional atmosphere. Finding ways how present the truth in order to inject the truth into various classes, documentaries and debates makes a huge difference in how people will perceive the truth even if it is truly the real factual truth. Also once you debate someone it perhaps isn't the best way just to spill out the truth in autistic fashion but to start more gently so that your opponent can't take back the BS he/she said and then you hit them with everything you got. The truth will remain the truth and there wouldn't be lies but the impression of the opponents incompetence will be obvious to anyone especially if the person starts to panic, what eases the getting the people to right path. The fact is that spreading of the truth is fundamentally a political activity no matter how you turn it. However if you don't spread it that in a way has the same effect as if it doesn't exist. The political culture can be good or bad but you can't really separate spreading or knowing the truth from politics (Nordic countries included).


When you present something you need to know your audience even if you are going to speak the truth and nothing but the truth, since not everyone will have the same knowledge to get what you are really saying. There is a reason why today there is so much specialization, since no one can know everything (not even close). If you are going to explain the details of how light is both particle and wave at the same time the person without proper education will think you are crazy (at best). The same can be said about climate change, explaining that to the person that doesn't have much knowledge in Chemistry and/or Geography can be a real rhetorical challenge. In a way the question of can this topic really be presented in the form that fits everyone is highly questionable, especially since you can't really present the the topic of this scale in info and research in the form that fits the everyday life (there is just too much info and combinations). So you must be careful with what you are presenting so that you don't make holes in logic or rhetoric that can be exploited. Plus there is a question of everyone fitting the same standard, what suggests that you should have a version for average Joe, version for business people, version for scientists, version for kids ... etc. You don't have to say a single factual lie in all of the versions but the style of presentation can really make a difference with every group. In a way with climate change we got stuck exactly because the rhetoric was too emotional and imprecise for the scale of change that is required to turn this around, since the presentation was done by wrong people, with wrong presentation strategy and perhaps even with wrong social desires/goals. So striking that one down wasn't that much of a challenge.



Therefore if you don't find the idea of use/interest that may simply be because it was presented to you in a wrong way.

 

[Lib]

And that is the mistake of pretty much every truth seeker out there. Which is exactly why we are where we are.

You confuse truth seeking with knowledge.

The world doesn't revolve around you (or me for that matter). Therefore in order to have the truth known you need to spread it and that is a science on it's own. It isn't the same if you are giving the truth to 10 people a day on the fly or you can reach thousands in a professional atmosphere. Finding ways how present the truth in order to inject the truth into various classes, documentaries and debates makes a huge difference in how people will perceive the truth even if it is truly the real factual truth. Also once you debate someone it perhaps isn't the best way just to spill out the truth in autistic fashion but to start more gently so that your opponent can't take back the BS he/she said and then you hit them with everything you got. The truth will remain the truth and there wouldn't be lies but the impression of the opponents incompetence will be obvious to anyone especially if the person starts to panic, what eases the getting the people to right path. The fact is that spreading of the truth is fundamentally a political activity no matter how you turn it. However if you don't spread it that in a way has the same effect as if it doesn't exist. The political culture can be good or bad but you can't really separate spreading or knowing the truth from politics (Nordic countries included).

It's because people are constantly lied to and buttered up from a very early age, that they get used to this sort of communication, it's normal to them. You'd be surprised how little of a problem this was in the Nordics, and it started to become one in a response to the authoritarian approach of Merkel.

I have no idea what is the autistic fashion tbh.

When you present something you need to know your audience even if you are going to speak the truth and nothing but the truth, since not everyone will have the same knowledge to get what you are really saying. There is a reason why today there is so much specialization, since no one can know everything (not even close). If you are going to explain the details of how light is both particle and wave at the same time the person without proper education will think you are crazy (at best). The same can be said about climate change, explaining that to the person that doesn't have much knowledge in Chemistry and/or Geography can be a real rhetorical challenge. In a way the question of can this topic really be presented in the form that fits everyone is highly questionable, especially since you can't really present the the topic of this scale in info and research in the form that fits the everyday life (there is just too much info and combinations). So you must be careful with what you are presenting so that you don't make holes in logic or rhetoric that can be exploited. Plus there is a question of everyone fitting the same standard, what suggests that you should have a version for average Joe, version for business people, version for scientists, version for kids ... etc. You don't have to say a single factual lie in all of the versions but the style of presentation can really make a difference with every group. In a way with climate change we got stuck exactly because the rhetoric was too emotional and imprecise for the scale of change that is required to turn this around, since the presentation was done by wrong people, with wrong presentation strategy and perhaps even with wrong social desires/goals. So striking that one down wasn't that much of a challenge.

Therefore if you don't find the idea of use/interest that may simply be because it was presented to you in a wrong way.

The problem with physics today is that there isn't cohesion between the different theories. That's why it's actually illogical for the kids. Fewer physics teachers pay attention to the fact the the theories are contradictory. I think it's getting better now. If you can't explain something simply, you don't understand it.