ManipuLation

[Virtual ghost]

You confuse truth seeking with knowledge.

I am not, I am simply trying to explain to you that knowledge without defense and it's advocates doesn't have too good odds even if it is knowledge. Especially since the education systems are evidently liked to political spheres and concepts. What means that our problem is much more political than anything else and you can't clearly separate knowledge and politics due to that link, even if everything works perfectly that would be because of clean/good policy. Therefore I claim that this wouldn't be fixed if those that are on the side of knowledge don't change their rhetoric and systematically engage all the BS that is floating around. At this point we are under so much junk that the very word "Rhetoric" is considered to be politically correct word for lying and idiots in suits, what is more of a "dark side" of rhetoric than rhetoric in general. Which is because our media space is completely filled with compete nonsense, since this "dark side" became so dominant. However that isn't going to change if academics will stay in their offices/labs and protesters will carry some childish transparents made of the BS that they saw on TV. There is just too much crap that you just can't blow it all away without deliberation and improved display of facts.

It's because people are constantly lied to and buttered up from a very early age, so they are 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.

It is pretty much the same in my country, this is exactly why EU support is in the toilet at the moment. I am simply saying that building tranches wouldn't work here because with this you leave basically the whole media space to BSers. Therefore the fight needs to be brought to them and for that you need to think through the arguments and facts to find a way from which angle to approach. What isn't lying, this is clarity of communication. What is somewhat of a manipulation since it is deliberate but factually isn't lying and it is certainly better than clear mix of manipulation and lying. Basic morality says that "fighting fire with fire" is bad but when you consider where we are all going I am starting to have serious doubts about this claim.

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.

Exactly, mixed messages. What doesn't sit well with people, especially those that don't care about this kind of things. If it happens that you don't know you should be able to say that without getting trashed, what is a change in how the society sets rhetorical standards. While current system/logic is replacing pretty much every "I don't know" with BS.

 

[Lib]

I am not, I am simply trying to explain to you that knowledge without defense and it's advocates doesn't have too good odds even if it is knowledge. Especially since the education systems are evidently liked to political spheres and concepts. What means that our problem is much more political than anything else and you can't clearly separate knowledge and politics due to that link, even if everything works perfectly that would be because of clean/good policy. Therefore I claim that this wouldn't be fixed if those that are on the side of knowledge don't change their rhetoric and systematically engage all the BS that is floating around. At this point we are under so much junk that the very word "Rhetoric" is considered to be politically correct word for lying and idiots in suits, what is more of a "dark side" of rhetoric than rhetoric in general. Which is because our media space is completely filled with compete nonsense, since this "dark side" became so dominant. However that isn't going to change if academics will stay in their offices/labs and protesters will carry some childish transparents made of the BS that they saw on TV. There is just too much crap that you just can't blow it all away without deliberation and improved display of facts.

Fuck the rhetoric, people must start to think on their own. The only rhetoric that I value is the one which doesn't use non existing definitions of the words.

It is pretty much the same in my country, this is exactly why EU support is in the toilet at the moment. I am simply saying that building tranches wouldn't work here because with this you leave basically the whole media space to BSers. Therefore the fight needs to be brought to them and for that you need to think through the arguments and facts to find a way from which angle to approach. What isn't lying, this is clarity of communication. What is somewhat of a manipulation since it is deliberate but factually isn't lying and it is certainly better than clear mix of manipulation and lying. Basic morality says that "fighting fire with fire" is bad but when you consider where we are all going I am starting to have serious doubts about this claim.

Clarity of communication is to state the facts. Expressing one's point in a clear, logical way is not manipulation. Manipulation through suppression of free speech is, for example, refusing to address certain points of view, just because you find them wrong, without obviously having a clear idea why. You just do. Manipulation is to be trying to control others' thoughts and the conversation, the topics they talk about.

Exactly, mixed messages. What doesn't sit well with people, especially those that don't care about this kind of things. If it happens that you don't know you should be able to say that without getting trashed, what is a change in how the society sets rhetorical standards. While current system/logic is replacing pretty much every "I don't know" with BS.

You are not to tell people how to talk because you think their language is wrong. I find it wrong that certain people are breathing my air, but, hey, I'm not feeling entitled to take it from them.

 

[Maou]

Time to ramble a bit.

There is no "truth", there is only perspective. Every human tries to communicate their perspective. Science and fact take back burner for understanding the world in order of function. People are predominately run by their values, and principles, then seek confirmation through science and like minded individuals. Few, ever, try to see other's perspective in politics/life as a whole. The "truth" is different for everyone. To get people to see the same truth you do, you must get into their perspective. See and feel as they do. Know their values, and virtue.

The world of education is a giant clusterfuck of perspectives that are largely incompatible. People cling to certain ideologies as its closer to their perspective. But no perspective is inherantly stupid. Ignorant, but not stupid. Education, only helps so much because its flawed in the same way peoples perspectives are flawed. Sometimes its the worse perspectives that are deemed good, and the good ones are deemed bad. So bad ideas get perpetuated as the "truth". That there in lies the issue with education. What is good and bad is always changing depending on perspective, senario, and emotion.

If everyone went on science and hard fact, the world would be vastly different. But it doesn't, its run on values and emotions. Its why society is inherantly flawed, and why the more you bank on the "people" and the "truth", the more unstable it becomes.

 

[Lib]

Time to ramble a bit.

There is no "truth", there is only perspective. Every human tries to communicate their perspective. Science and fact take back burner for understanding the world in order of function. People are predominately run by their values, and principles, then seek confirmation through science and like minded individuals. Few, ever, try to see other's perspective in politics/life as a whole. The "truth" is different for everyone. To get people to see the same truth you do, you must get into their perspective. See and feel as they do. Know their values, and virtue.

The world of education is a giant clusterfuck of perspectives that are largely incompatible. People cling to certain ideologies as its closer to their perspective. But no perspective is inherantly stupid. Ignorant, but not stupid. Education, only helps so much because its flawed in the same way peoples perspectives are flawed. Sometimes its the worse perspectives that are deemed good, and the good ones are deemed bad. So bad ideas get perpetuated as the "truth". That there in lies the issue with education. What is good and bad is always changing depending on perspective, senario, and emotion.

If everyone went on science and hard fact, the world would be vastly different. But it doesn't, its run on values and emotions. Its why society is inherantly flawed, and why the more you bank on the "people" and the "truth", the more unstable it becomes.

By 'the truth', I meant mostly facts with practical significance, not some ideological bs. For example, the number of people who died in car accidents any given year, or the existence of gravity. Such facts are important to all of us, while ideology normally is not concerned with the facts, but with a self-serving goal.

 

[Maou]

By 'the truth', I meant mostly facts with practical significance, not some ideological bs. For example, the number of people who died in car accidents any given year, or the existence of gravity. Such facts are important to all of us, while ideology normally is not concerned with the facts, but with a self-serving goal.

And with politics etc, I see it exactly as you stated above. Political parties are based in ideology, for a self-serving goal. And the ones offering the "Truth" are lying, its not truth. It is perspective. Some with objective evidence, some with theories. Both exist to pull you into their perspective. It is manipulation.

It is far easier to manipulate someone if you get your victim to see their values in your group. So the manipulator says nice, positive things. Never negative things. They tell you how smart you are for believing in them too. All subtly, never obviously. Like posting a non-peer reviewed study claiming X group is smarter than the opposition. Which creates a positive feedback loop. It creates attachment to the manipulator. It generates loyalty. Those who are being manipulated rarely question if they are being manipulated.

Its those with nothing bad to say, who are the manipulators.

 

[Lib]

Its those with nothing bad to say, who are the manipulators.

I agree with everything but that^. Witch hint and morally shaming someone who questions the fairness of your standards are also quite effective strategies.

 

[Maou]

I agree with everything but that^. Witch hint and morally shaming someone who questions the fairness of your standards are also quite effective strategies.

I think withholding yourself in times where someone is making a mistake and you had the power to stop them, or intentionally didn't stop them is manipulation. They should say something "bad" to them.

I think the witch hunt mentality is useless lol. I agree with promoting individualism, and not taking sides to combat manipulative people.

 

[Lib]

I think withholding yourself in times where someone is making a mistake and you had the power to stop them, or intentionally didn't stop them is manipulation. They should say something "bad" to them.

I think the witch hunt mentality is useless lol. I agree with promoting individualism, and not taking sides to combat manipulative people.

Not sure if your first example qualifies for manipulation, in the worse case it's ill intention. In a conversation, one should be able to express disapproval and honest opinion. But IME, the surest way to end up feeling/looking like a fool is by providing help or opinion when no one asked for it.

I meant that witch hunt is a manipulative technique through and through.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Fuck the rhetoric, people must start to think on their own. The only rhetoric that I value is the one which doesn't use non existing definitions of the words.


Clarity of communication is to state the facts. Expressing one's point in a clear, logical way is not manipulation. Manipulation through suppression of free speech is, for example, refusing to address certain points of view, just because you find them wrong, without obviously having a clear idea why. You just do. Manipulation is to be trying to control others' thoughts and the conversation, the topics they talk about.


You are not to tell people how to talk because you think their language is wrong. I find it wrong that certain people are breathing my air, but, hey, I'm not feeling entitled to take it from them.

In that case I say we use different definitions on many terms since we have different first language ... and case the is closed.

 

[I Tonya]

How would you define manipulation?
Do you condemn it per se or the intentions are important?
Do people who have been manipulated must be held responsible for their actions?

EDIT: I thought it said/meant should ppl who manipulate be held accountable.
It depends on the situation over all... People are malleable, simple thinking patterns... No, I do not personally believe they should be held in the same amount of accountability as the manipulator. It is because it was not a fair situation between the two interaction. They have laws in place to protect ppl from such conartist.

In the context you are using manipulation: Psychological manipulation - Wikipedia

Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through abusive, deceptive, or underhanded tactics.

I see it used in different terms, HOW it operations is one person pulling strings behind the scenes without the other's consent or more so a group of ppl they use in their master plan.
YES, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY BAD, DON'T EVEN WITH ANY BS. If you even give me one "What if it was for good"...

 

[Lark]

Just going to leave this good shit here:

 

[Lib]

Just going to leave this good shit here:

How is it related to manipulation, though?

 

[Lark]

How is it related to manipulation, though?

When you watch it you'll know.

Or you wont.

Its up to you.

 

[Lib]

When you watch it you'll know.

Or you wont.

Its up to you.

I'm not a psychiatrist nor a mind reader

 

[Kanra Jest]

Some consider manipulation an Art.

"The Art of Manipulation" for example

 

[1487610420]

Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar

 

[Lib]

Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar

lol, is that the type of books you read?

 

[1487610420]

lol, is that the type of books you read?

Why do you want to know?

 

[Lib]

Why do you want to know?

Just curious. It's true that such manipulative behavior is used by some women but they are normally bordering psychopathy.

 

[Lark]

Just curious. It's true that such manipulative behavior is used by some women but they are normally bordering psychopathy.

Who says?