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

Persuasion through status rather than argument

robkhenderson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 251 posts

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#171

Post by grif-fin »

lapcat wrote: post #164
grif-fin wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad? Isn't it scary or least worrying that 40 percent of Americans reported that they did not feel free to speak their minds? Or are you implying they belong to the group who participated in casual racism and sexism that used to be a lot more common in…

> Or are you implying they belong to the group who participated in casual racism and sexism that used to be a lot more common in the past Some of them do, yes. However, "The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then." In the past, there was no such thing as being afraid of speaking your mind on social media . You were typically speaking your mind in private, among friends and fam…

I would argue having significant part of a society whether right or wrong in anyone's view having their thoughts not disclosed and represented to the rest of the society should be worrying for everyone in that society.

The history of our nature has shown self-censorship usually erupts by the most radicals of that group which is an uglier problem to have I would think than allowing their right or wrong thoughts to be out in the light.

>The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then.

This to me only highlights the extend to which we should be worried rather than exaggerating it.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#172

Post by calderknight »

fourthark wrote: post #169
calderknight wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone? Plenty of people don't practice ideological thinking in the first place.

Unless one doesn't think at all, or is completely inconsistent, one will have ideology.

Seems like a pretty crazy claim, want to share your reasoning?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#173

Post by warkdarrior »

h2odragon wrote: post #167
lapcat wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad? The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then. When people spoke their mind, it wasn't broadcast publicly to the whole world, so there was less fear of backlash.

Example: "People should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin" Saying that phrase, went from forbidden, to controversial, to "you're not allowed to disagree," to "you're not allowed to agree" so rapidly. Someone who actually holds it as a principle has had enemies on all sides at various times. Many of those who find the phrase offensive are not offended because it clashes with thei…

I missed the memo that I am not allowed to agree with that quote. When did this happen?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#174

Post by aDyslecticCrow »

mistermann wrote: post #91
dalbasal wrote: post #55

The majority of all argument, debates, polemics... it's all "hacks." We're all dirty tricks, if we're being honest. Formalizing and naming templates of fallacies and dirty tricks... it's kind of a fallacious trick in itself. Logically valid, convincing, and the way we actually think a completely different. There are places where these come together, often requiring a lot of effort. The reality that we, all of us, way…

> The way formal logic works, and the way we think, talk and convince one another.. they are very far apart. Strict logic is "pedantry", "JAQing off", Sea-lioning, "conspiratorial thinking", etc. I know of no social media platform where this is not true (based on replies and voting). And (seemingly) ironically, "scientific thinkers" are often particularly prone to the phenomenon. > That doesn't mean we can't grasp lo…

I don't remember who i got this from. But It's been part of my thoughts since.

Smart people are dangerously good at finding compelling rational arguments for any position. Logic and reasoning has no guarantee what-so-ever to end up correct.

Communism is perfectly rational. So is is national socialism, slavery, "a modest proposal", "Brave new world". Self reasoning may just make you more stubborn.

two things i think helps? but that may just me by own rationality tricking me.

1. Limit the death of the argument. Don't go too many steps away from the axioms or assumptions. Leaps of logic give us the most freedom to creatively warp the outcome.

2. Die on all the hills. Argue your misguided ideas loudly and proud to your peers. Discussing dumb ideas is the only way to find what dumb idea is the least dumb.

Being scared of being wrong, and aligning with others, leaves dumb ideas unchallenged, and dumber ideas unexplored.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#175

Post by Georgelemental »

lapcat wrote: post #156
Animats wrote: post #149

> In the 1950s, at the height of McCarthyism, 13.4 percent of Americans reported that “felt less free to speak their mind than they used to.” In 1987, the figure had reached 20 percent. By 2019, 40 percent of Americans reported that they did not feel free to speak their minds. This isn’t a partisan issue, either. Gibson and Sutherland report that, “The percentage of Democrats who are worried about speaking their mind…

I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad? The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then. When people spoke their mind, it wasn't broadcast publicly to the whole world, so there was less fear of backlash.

> I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad?

Even if we grant that the rise in self-censorship is entirely due to "casual racism and sexism" (and I don't grant it), wouldn't that meant that 40% of people are secret bigots? That sounds bad, you would rather they be open about their beliefs so you can identify them, no?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#176

Post by fourthark »

calderknight wrote: post #172
fourthark wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless one doesn't think at all, or is completely inconsistent, one will have ideology.

Seems like a pretty crazy claim, want to share your reasoning?

Merriam-Webster: "Ideology: a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture"

No ideology = no characteristic thinking.

If you think you don't have ideology, you probably have the dominant one. Or don't think.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#177

Post by fragmede »

patrick451 wrote: post #157
lapcat wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad? The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then. When people spoke their mind, it wasn't broadcast publicly to the whole world, so there was less fear of backlash.

Yes. Just like sexuality, racisism and sexism are part of what it means to be human. They are all natural instincts. Suppressing them is leading to the same sort of dysfunction that sexual suppression lead to in the Victorian age. That said, in the same way it's not healthy for society to be full of sexual deviants, it's also not healthy for it to be full of flaming racists. Moderation in all things, but nothing wron…

> it's not healthy for society to be full of sexual deviants

I'm under the impression that homosexuality is largely accepted in the western world, and that largely, western society hasn't been destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#178

Post by Georgelemental »

cdot2 wrote: post #155
throwawayqqq11 wrote: post #31

> It might seem intuitive to believe that people with less education are more manipulable. But research suggests this may not be true. > High-status people are more preoccupied with how others view them. Which means that educated and/or affluent people may be especially prone to peripheral, as opposed to central, methods of persuasion. There is a hidden assumtion in the above part. Did you spot it? It is that educate…

Everyone believes their ideology is based on reason and not determined by their sociotope. My sociotope just happens to be the most reasonable one.

I have a very different ideology from most of my social milieu. That's how I know I am truly enlightened and rational /s

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#179

Post by Georgelemental »

shannifin wrote: post #105

Is there a way to self-evaluate whether or not your belief is the product of social status preservation? If not, what good is it to recognize the possibility, save for accusing others of it?

If you radically changed your beliefs and told all your friends and peers about your conversion, what would happen to your status?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#180

Post by mlinhares »

lapcat wrote: post #156
Animats wrote: post #149

> In the 1950s, at the height of McCarthyism, 13.4 percent of Americans reported that “felt less free to speak their mind than they used to.” In 1987, the figure had reached 20 percent. By 2019, 40 percent of Americans reported that they did not feel free to speak their minds. This isn’t a partisan issue, either. Gibson and Sutherland report that, “The percentage of Democrats who are worried about speaking their mind…

I'm not sure that it's scary. After all, casual racism and sexism used to be a lot more common in the past. Now people are called out and criticized on those. Is that bad? The other factor is the rise of internet social media, which didn't exist back then. When people spoke their mind, it wasn't broadcast publicly to the whole world, so there was less fear of backlash.

The fact that in almost 2024 people still don't understand social media is NOT your friends in a table where you can make shitty comments with no consequences still baffles me.

People always have had to separate public and private life, the only differences now is that it seems like they don't understand what is public or private anymore.

I frequently see people making public comments on social networks about their employers or customers that no one should be making, they get fired and then complain there's no "free speech" anymore. The stupidity is really something.

Post reply on HN