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

Frame Control

knowingless.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: Frame Control

#11

Post by bsedlm »

halayli wrote: post #5

I feel OP's definition needs to be narrowed down a bit. Debating climate change with someone that denies it is not a matter of opinion. Accepting that the sky is blue doesn't mean that I jumped into the other person's frame or I inherited their belief system. It just means I learnt a new fact.

> It just means I learnt a new fact.

and that you're comfortably within a fact-based frame (perhaps "meta-frame" is more appropiate). Which is a very effective frame which enables cooperation with millions of others but nonetheless is a frame.

Re: Frame Control

#12

Post by yorwba »

bidivia wrote: post #10

I believe the article is an example of overthinking. If you think so much about an issue without the right data you will get wrong conclusions. In other words, garbage in, garbage out, no matter how smart(how good your processing unit is) you are. This woman looks intellectually smart, emotionally dumb and immature. This woman had a pathological relationship and generalizes over it. She is projecting that relationshi…

> This woman had a pathological relationship and generalizes over it. She is projecting that relationship over everyone

From the article:

The vast majority of good people with good intent aren’t doing any significant kind of frame control;

> healthy people will avoid her like the plague

If you read her other writing you might learn that people are willing to pay significant amounts of money for her company. Maybe they aren't healthy, I dunno.

I think you improperly slotted this insightful article as "woman with victim mentality projects her trauma on everyone" instead of "highly observant person describes behavioral patterns from experience". Maybe read it again?

Re: Frame Control

#13

Post by yorwba »

yveezy wrote: post #4

Science: Sun rises in the east A: Sun rises in the west B: Here is some evidence that sun rises in the east (recommendation) (or) You're insane for not believing in that (pressure?) Is B trying to use components of frame control to take over A's reality? IMO the article feels very convoluted

> Is B trying to use components of frame control to take over A's reality?

Not according to the article:

[Debate, Recommendation, Pressure, Rescue, Aggression] are all attempts to control your frame, but none of these is what I mean by frame control.

Re: Frame Control

#14

Post by [deleted] »

halayli wrote: post #5

I feel OP's definition needs to be narrowed down a bit. Debating climate change with someone that denies it is not a matter of opinion. Accepting that the sky is blue doesn't mean that I jumped into the other person's frame or I inherited their belief system. It just means I learnt a new fact.

[deleted]

Re: Frame Control

#15

Post by User23 »

This is an important concept to understand, but the author has an extremely pathological perspective, evidently caused by a poor paternal relationship.

Any giga-successful founder is going to have frame like a five hundred year old oak. Perhaps the archetypal example is Steve Jobs’s (in)famous Reality Distortion Field.

In virtually any pitch meeting the investor’s Bayesian prior is that you’re not worth investing in. If you can’t hold frame that you are you’re not going to make it to yes.

Another example is romantic success. The most successful persons in that field maintain a powerful frame that they are desirable to be with.

Re: Frame Control

#16

Post by Aella »

halayli wrote: post #5

I feel OP's definition needs to be narrowed down a bit. Debating climate change with someone that denies it is not a matter of opinion. Accepting that the sky is blue doesn't mean that I jumped into the other person's frame or I inherited their belief system. It just means I learnt a new fact.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I believe I provided a list of examples similar to the ones you give here near the beginning of the post clearly labeled "this is not frame control"

Re: Frame Control

#17

Post by Aella »

errantmind wrote: post #2

This appears to be an example of weaponized generalization. The examples of what frame control looks like and doesn't look like are broad to the point of meaning anything you want them to mean, OR, lack any sense of boundaries. The author says everyone exercises frame control all the time, including themselves, and doesn't know what to do about it. In another sentence says their reaction when encountering it is to 'b…

Author here - you're right, it is very broad. You might wonder why "if it's so broad, why are you trying to write so strongly about an undefined thing?" And my answer is because there is a real thing with real effects out there. I used a lot of examples from my childhood because a lot lies in the details, but I've talked to a lot of other people who suffered a lot of damage from non-parental (and nonromantic) frame control relationships, and there seemed to be a really unique and consistent style of damage that was done, that I'd never seen talked about before.

This post was my attempt to name the thing that causes that style of damage. It's hard for me to do, perhaps someone else has more skill than me and can be more precise - but I am trying to name a real thing, one I suspect a lot of people haven't ever run into before.

I'm fully aware that there's lots of "bad advice" in the post, but I don't have the skill to convey the thing I'm attempting to without using some of that. Ultimately I think the tradeoff is worth it, though; I feel strongly about trying to name this very elusive thing.

Re: Frame Control

#18

Post by Aella »

bidivia wrote: post #10

I believe the article is an example of overthinking. If you think so much about an issue without the right data you will get wrong conclusions. In other words, garbage in, garbage out, no matter how smart(how good your processing unit is) you are. This woman looks intellectually smart, emotionally dumb and immature. This woman had a pathological relationship and generalizes over it. She is projecting that relationshi…

There's a looot of assumptions here, but for the record I don't think everybody is a frame controller. I've met maybe 5 clear ones, total in my life?

Re: Frame Control

#19

Post by octokatt »

bidivia wrote: post #10

I believe the article is an example of overthinking. If you think so much about an issue without the right data you will get wrong conclusions. In other words, garbage in, garbage out, no matter how smart(how good your processing unit is) you are. This woman looks intellectually smart, emotionally dumb and immature. This woman had a pathological relationship and generalizes over it. She is projecting that relationshi…

I am not sure what the point of your post is, but it seems argumentative and victim-blaming, which is a bit egregious given she’s posting an article about being gas-lighted and trying to recover a better sense of perspective.

Can you reframe your argument to be more constructive?

Re: Frame Control

#20

Post by jimkleiber »

Aella wrote: post #17
errantmind wrote: post #2

This appears to be an example of weaponized generalization. The examples of what frame control looks like and doesn't look like are broad to the point of meaning anything you want them to mean, OR, lack any sense of boundaries. The author says everyone exercises frame control all the time, including themselves, and doesn't know what to do about it. In another sentence says their reaction when encountering it is to 'b…

Author here - you're right, it is very broad. You might wonder why "if it's so broad, why are you trying to write so strongly about an undefined thing?" And my answer is because there is a real thing with real effects out there. I used a lot of examples from my childhood because a lot lies in the details, but I've talked to a lot of other people who suffered a lot of damage from non-parental (and nonromantic) frame c…

Personally, I appreciated a lot of what you wrote, and even more so, that you're standing up for your own frame in response to the person saying what their frame is.

> Convoluted, conflicted, generalized, and entitled.

I wrote a blog post called the subjective adjective[0], where I talked about how sometimes we take our own personal feelings/experiences and then stamp an objective reality onto them. E.g., if I feel conflicted, I may say that the article itself is conflicted, implying that everyone would feel conflicted when seeing the article—not necessarily true.

--

Here I'll go presenting the way I see it, my (current) frame...

I wonder if it's more of a conflict between competing frames and one person (whom you name the frame controller) has a stronger and more stubborn grip on their frame and the other (the frame surrenderer?) has a weaker and looser grip on theirs. I say this imagining that in many situations, I would fall more in the camp of strongly and stubbornly believing things; whereas in some, I would surrender my frame to the frame of another rather quickly—e.g., cooking, painting, accounting, just to name a few.

I find that I surrender to what the other believes when I feel particularly insecure, doubtful, and uncertain of what I believe. Someone insults my intelligence? Most of the time, I stand strong. Someone insults my physical appearance? Most of the time, I acquiesce.

While you may prefer to label the people as frame controllers, I prefer to label the behavior as frame controlling, or maybe even frame conflict, with frame conquering and frame surrendering. Lol, I don't know actually.

Regardless, I feel really grateful you wrote this and helped me reflect on this more. I also imagine, if you had been in such situations with your dad where he were defining The Frame, it might feel difficult to define and defend the frame you're presenting here. So, thank you for putting it forth.

[0]: https://www.jimkleiber.com/the-subjective-adjective/

Post reply on HN