Live data from Hacker News

How can I influence others without manipulating them?

andiroberts.com

181–190 of 232 posts

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#181
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all well and good, but when you have to put your trust in someone and person A believes "it's wrong to cheat people" and person B has a whole framework for thinking about the problem on a case by case basis, you just go with A, right?

I feel like people who make such blanket value statements like "I don't cheat people" or "I don't lie" aren't being honest with themselves, or are putting too much faith in the stability of the society they live in. The easiest retort is Anne Frank. You're hiding her in your attic and a Nazi asks if you're hiding enemies of the state. There you go, a time when you'll definitely lie and cheat! Someone might answer, "w…

To cheat someone implies there is some obligation owed which is reneged upon, even if that's just the minute obligation owed from one member of a society to another.

In your hypothetical situation, I owe no such obligation to the Nazis who as you'll remember were an occupying force. I entered into no social compact with them.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The universe doesn't respect that viewpoint. There is no mechanism in reality or life that prevents hard tradeoffs from having to be made. What the universe does or doesn't respect has no bearing on what is or is not right / good.

Are you role playing in a fictional world? Where you can make up whatever ideals you want, and make them happen. Then I am for nobody ever suffering injustice. That would be good and right, indeed. Or, making actual choices in reality? Where there are limits to what we can do, but making hard choices well has positive impact. I am speaking to the latter.

> Or, making actual choices in reality? Where there are limits to what we can do, but making hard choices well has positive impact.

Impact is irrelevant in Kantian ethics, deontological ethics [1] and virtue ethics [2]. A choice is good and right because it the nature of the choice itself in deontology, or because of how it defines one character in virtue ethics, not because of what effects it may or may not have on the world.

Every novice approaching ethics naively assumes a framework of consequentialism [3], where every choice is judged by its consequences, but this framework is deeply problematic and we have literal proofs that not all ethic theories can be reformulated in terms of consequences [4].

The original post I replied to also naively assumed a consequentialist framing, and I replied that this framing is not universal and so his conclusion does not follow. You can continue to double down on "it's obvious that consequences matter for ethical choices", but that doesn't make it true, and thus, it does not support the original argument.

[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/

[2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/

[3] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/

[4] https://philarchive.org/rec/BROCT

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#183
This is discussed at length in ancient philosophy. Reason is showing people why they should come to your position. Rhetoric, persuasion, manipulation are all ways of convincing people to take your side based on a story, rather than dispassionate good faith.

> Yet logic alone is not enough. Overused, it can become cold and detached.

The author here shows show their hand.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where there is no way of knowing whether my blue is the same as your blue, can there be a way to be objectively right about the colour of the sky?

your perception of blue might be different than mine, but as a society we have agreed that specific wavelengths of light are blue. those wavelengths are absolutely measurable.

Indeed, so if that particular society has apparently agreed to call “blue” a different wavelength then you are the one objectively in the wrong.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#185

I'll respond to the title instead of the article. As an attorney, I've found that the best persuasion is the removal of impediments and friction standing between the person you hope to influence and what they want to do in the first place. Most other tactics amount to force or deceit ("manipulation").

> force or deceit

exactly!

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#186

Someone once told me the only way to influence is to let yourself be influenced. You have to open up to the other person / other side or nothing will move And you never control how the influence works exactly :). You influence others in ways you won't be able to control or predict.

Probably why chuggers (charity muggers) never get my money.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#187
post #65

People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies. -- Blair Warren

So... parents?

Parents are the worst part of many children's lives. So... probably friends.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#188
post #178
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes there is no win/win.

Give me an example.

I'm sure you can think of a personally meaningful example if you try; have you turned on the news lately? There's a big story that people seem to be having a hard time finding a win/win and people are starving and being killed.

Sadly, that description doesn't even narrow it down to one "no-win" situation I can think of, so your comment is slightly concerning on its face.

Re: How can I influence others without manipulating them?

#190

Persuasion that happens in good faith is a two-way street. You explain your position, but also truly listen to theirs. If you are prepared to change your own position based on what they say, then you can hope that they might change theirs based on what you say. If it is truly two way in this sense, including your best efforts to extract from the other party their strongest, potentially unexpected, arguments for their…

Even if you’re not going to change your position, such as when the other party doesn’t believe basic facts or incontrovertible evidence, you have to be willing to listen to their position to understand why they hold that position.

When you have a debate with someone who is only waiting for their turn to talk and visibly doesn’t care to parse what you’re saying, you are not motivated to hear them out.

It has to be a discussion, not a lecture combined with light condescension and dismissal.

Post reply on HN