Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 86 posts

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#71

Post by AssumeTheBest »

wazoox wrote: post #37

That reminds me that apparently so many people actually seem to like going to places like bars and hang there for hours keeping on completely pointless conversations and drinking beer. Really, I don't get it. Twice a year is Okay, but twice a week? I'd be bored to death. Can anyone explain this social mystery?

It's more like dogs playing in a bar. Nobody is really talking much, they are just exerting social power and forming groups and having a good time. If you aren't obsessed with socializing, it would be really boring, and even shamefully so.

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#72

Post by lsc »

dkarl wrote: post #32
lsc wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you know what I don't like? I don't like not knowing if a person is genuinely interested or just being polite. I mean, the last thing I want to do is to trap someone into a boring (to them) conversation. I'd much rather they tell me they aren't interested. On the other hand, I don't want to avoid talking to people out of unfounded fear. Really, the best solution is to have people leave when they are no longer interes…

You speak a minority language and will never persuade the majority to learn yours. On the other hand, it takes two to tango, and if they can't extricate themselves from an unwanted conversation with you, then either they aren't trying very hard (because they're passive-aggressive) or their social skills have limits just like yours. Either way, it's a combination of their weakness with yours that leads to awkwardness.…

I agree. I'm just trying to explain that this assumption that other people will break off the conversation if they are not interested is central to how I've overcome my own social anxiety.

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#73

Post by wazoox »

jdminhbg wrote: post #53
wazoox wrote: post #37

That reminds me that apparently so many people actually seem to like going to places like bars and hang there for hours keeping on completely pointless conversations and drinking beer. Really, I don't get it. Twice a year is Okay, but twice a week? I'd be bored to death. Can anyone explain this social mystery?

Most people go to bars with friends, not slight acquaintances, and have fun in-depth conversations, not pointless conversations. Most of the situations depicted in the cartoon are the result of unintentional meetings.

Well I always found that I had better and more in-depth conversations at my home or my friends' homes that at some public, crowded and noisy place :)

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#74

Post by wazoox »

AssumeTheBest wrote: post #71
wazoox wrote: post #37

That reminds me that apparently so many people actually seem to like going to places like bars and hang there for hours keeping on completely pointless conversations and drinking beer. Really, I don't get it. Twice a year is Okay, but twice a week? I'd be bored to death. Can anyone explain this social mystery?

It's more like dogs playing in a bar. Nobody is really talking much, they are just exerting social power and forming groups and having a good time. If you aren't obsessed with socializing, it would be really boring, and even shamefully so.

I guess that's it. I'm a bear, I don't enjoy social interaction much, and I hate crowds :)

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#75

Post by wazoox »

bastardlee wrote: post #47
wazoox wrote: post #37

That reminds me that apparently so many people actually seem to like going to places like bars and hang there for hours keeping on completely pointless conversations and drinking beer. Really, I don't get it. Twice a year is Okay, but twice a week? I'd be bored to death. Can anyone explain this social mystery?

Potential sex

Yep, up to a certain point this describes lots of people.

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#76

Post by rubyrescue »

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #43
rubyrescue wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seattle is one of the worst cities in the US, nay, world for this!

I assume you have comprehensive personal experience of everywhere else in the USA, nay, the world, to be able to say this. I'd love to hear of your extensive travel experiences.

OK! I'll take your comment at face value! I live in South America, grew up in the southern US (deep south), spent 11 years in Seattle, worked off and on in California, spent lots of time with friends from all over the world, but particularly Korea, Japan, Norway, England... I've never met a more passive agressive group of people or place than Seattle. And I say that as someone who still really loves the city and will probably go back there.

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#77

Post by loewenskind »

philwelch wrote: post #58
loewenskind wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why "talking politics" is something to so desperately avoid in the US. Many intelligent people just wont talk about leaving mostly the close minded life long party members to be the only voices. Personally I think this is why the political landscape is so awful in the US.

Hi, I'm an intelligent American who occasionally tries talking about politics. Many otherwise intelligent Americans are monomaniacal nutjobs or partisan hacks when it comes to politics. Of course, many Americans who are not otherwise intelligent are just as bad. People get indoctrinated in a certain political viewpoint and don't have the ability to take on good faith anyone who disagrees with them. As a result of thi…

If they really are as intelligent as you/they think then try pointing out to them their close mindedness [1]. I used to be firmly on the American right wing (i.e. didn't think other ideologies had much merit, if any) until I came to Europe and realized my views simply could not be reconciled with countries like e.g. Sweden doing just fine.

You can't discount something that works. As a programmer, I know that "works" doesn't mean that something is the best way or is even good at all, but it at least can't be discounted out of hand.

I wish there were a way to e.g. make pg's "how to disagree" required reading for anyone wishing to participate in political discussions (and vote for that matter).

[1] "Close minded" is often used as a kind of weapon by people unable to argue their point, but I use it to mean "unwilling to reconsider their position even when it's demonstrated to be untrue or at least incomplete".

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#78

Post by loewenskind »

Natsu wrote: post #62
loewenskind wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why "talking politics" is something to so desperately avoid in the US. Many intelligent people just wont talk about leaving mostly the close minded life long party members to be the only voices. Personally I think this is why the political landscape is so awful in the US.

> I don't get why "talking politics" is something to so desperately avoid in the US. It's because there isn't a single party where you can't find crazy people who have no contact with reality who also hate anyone who disagrees with them. Oh, and the blogs/online news comments are filled with paid political hacks during election season. During the election, I noticed things like how the same guy got first post with th…

I agree with what you said, I just think it can't be allowed to continue. It causes more and more damage all the time.

Maybe someone could make a TV show where you have guests and talk politics, but if one of the participants commits a logical fallacy (e.g. you're "but they're just as bad!" example) they have their mic turned off for 2 minutes, get kicked off the show or something. There must be some way to begin associating arguing from emotion with being "uncool".

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#79

Post by loewenskind »

narrator wrote: post #54
loewenskind wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I would find a person who did this really boring (no apparent life outside of the activity).

Think about the boring guy at the sailing class. Later on you find out he's a doctor, or a builder, or a fraud investigator or a republican or likes watching hockey or went to college at Stanford. What if he didn't tell you any of that until you had known him for a couple of weeks or even months during the course of that sailing class vs if he had told you that all up front? I usually find that nobody's eyes light up…

That's a fair goal, but I think the strict adherence to only certain conversation topics wont come off as mysterious. I think it will come off as creepy or boring. For me, being mysterious is being involved in any conversation in a way that everyone enjoys and only later realize that you didn't reveal anything about yourself in it.

Re: The Four Levels of Social Entrapment

#80

Post by philwelch »

hugh3 wrote: post #63
philwelch wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I'm an intelligent American who occasionally tries talking about politics. Many otherwise intelligent Americans are monomaniacal nutjobs or partisan hacks when it comes to politics. Of course, many Americans who are not otherwise intelligent are just as bad. People get indoctrinated in a certain political viewpoint and don't have the ability to take on good faith anyone who disagrees with them. As a result of thi…

Even if you do happen to get two people in a conversation who disagree politically and are capable of thoughtfully and intelligently discussing political issues, it's so much effort to do so that it's usually not a fun conversation unless you're already good friends with the person in question. Discussing politics with people you've just met, or people with whom you're only vaguely acquainted, is a recipe for disaste…

Worst of all is when you're in a group of people who think they're all in political agreement, but you disagree with all of them. (As a right-of-centre academic, this happens surprisingly often.)

I can't abide that, and usually speak up just to break the illusion that everyone agrees. Of course, frank discussions of real politics are probably a career-limiting move in faculty politics....

Post reply on HN