Intuition & Manipulation

[Auburn]

Warning - The following are only half-baked thoughts. It's awfully confusing even to me, but I'm hoping someone will understand what I'm trying to convey.


Intuition, when directed towards understanding people, can produce a high awareness of what reactions one could expect from others. If the intuitive also possesses keen emotional awareness, hir clarity of perception will been much higher.

Sometimes in a particular social interaction, the intuitive will know just how the other will respond to hir own actions in dozens of scenarios that are clearly visible in front of hir, and will be able to choose how to react to them in order to yield the desired outcome of the interaction. The more awareness of the dynamics of social interactions and human psychology they possess, the higher their ability to manipulate the situation is.

Manipulation. Say you were a psychic/genius, aware of every outcome that could result from interacting with someone; you know exactly how everyone will react if you say/do this or the other; would it be possible not to manipulate others?

A person approaches you, and you know you have to interact with hir. You already know how they will respond to whichever way you present yourself and you cannot escape having to present yourself in some way or another. Even saying nothing at all would be a type of reaction - and so all that is left is for you to choose, as you inevitably must.

***
​

Now I know nobody out there is that talented at perceiving people, but some do come close - and that's why I bring up this topic. For those people who can perceive the reactions of others - is it their responsibility to not abuse that power? Is it the fault of the less aware for being so naive, and ultimately their loss?

What about happiness? Let's say you know just what you could say to a friend to make them happy, but it would be a lie - though a harmless one. Should you deny them happiness for the sake of truth, or should you lie for the sake of their happiness?

Also, if we are able to perceive exactly what would yield happiness in others, are we responsible for fulfilling them with it? Would it be any different than seeing a thirsting child in front of you while you hold a jug of water in your hand?

***
​

Meh.. I don't even know where I'm going with this. I guess it sorta bothers me. I find myself in these situations sometimes and I wonder if awareness can sometimes be a curse as well as a blessing.

Being self-aware to such a level makes one realize just how manipulative others, as well as oneself, can be without even knowing it. However once I become aware of my own manipulative habits, my conscience steps in and stops me from doing that anymore. I can see something selfish in just about all of my actions. I wonder if I may reach a point where I just say "screw it" and silence my conscience completely instead of trying to meet it's impossible standards for me.

[/cerebral vomit]

 

[chloé]

I'm sorry that you feel that way. (Canned response, I know.) I completely understand your post, perhaps that's just me, but it reads very easily. You're very much right that intuition gives us certain advantages over people, meaning we must choose our actions carefully.

I don't understand why this troubles you since you do have a conscience. I think maybe what you're doing is questioning your own conscientious decisions. All these ethical questions you bring up - it's the role of the human conscience to instinctively prefer the most "conscientious" choice, right? So I don't see why you're uncomfortable just trusting your natural inclination. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the complexity of the conscience. But that would be my advice to you - just let instinct do the picking, because I suspect you'll make the right choices, since you do seem to be mindful of ethical values.

Does that make sense or am I missing something key here?

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Manipulation is more a natural tendency than a conscious effort, although some realise in themselves a better than average ability to manipulate and choose to do with it as they will. It almost sounds as if you see yourself as having better than average abilities in this and find yourself loathe to use them to your advantage? Not sure if you should use it or not?

*side note: I think we INTPs tend to try and avoid specifics and figure out things using generalities. An approach we may be more comfortable with but it seems to me that it may not be the most constructive to solving our dillemas. This is the second thread where I've noticed this the last couple of days but thinking back real quick, I see it often.

It is not your responsibility (function) to make others around you happy but you may be responsible (cause, liability) for someone being happy/unhappy. That is, unless you choose to take on that responsibility to make someone happy (a SO, for example).

Deny happiness for the sake of truth? How absolute are your principles for upholding truth? Some truths in life are more important than other truths. Figure out which way the scales of harm tip in your circumstances. By that I mean, which outcome would cause the most overall harm taking into account your principles and the other's feelings. Then act appropriately <------ironic coming from me

Of course like chloe, I may be missing something key here.

 

[Auburn]

@ Chloe - I'm glad it made any sort of sense to you.

There actually is something key missing. My conscience has been wavering and fading lately. I've been questioning the very concepts of morals and values lately, and at the moment everything is in a disassembled mess on the table, being examined carefully.

Currently, my conscience is a bother more than anything. Even the simplest questions are turned into difficult problems by it. I first examine the implications my answers could have, and what reactions they may cause in them.

[i.e. If I am asked "how are you", and am feeling shitty, I won't say that because I know that if I said I was feeling crappy they'd ask why, and that's just like asking for attention - which i feel is selfish. So I end up lying to them instead.]

If any signs leak at all, it is only if I display them intentionally <-- which also nags at me. But seeing how none of my family is intuitive, they won't pick up on anything unless I say it flat out, which I feel bad for doing but do it out of necessity.

 

[Cognisant]

At last we get to see Auburn's dark side

Your post is full of angst, depicting yourself as possessing the ability to manipulate and highly ashamed of yourself for having it, even more so for the incidental day-to-day manipulation we all do, because to you the distinction between it and conscious/intentional manipulation is one of mere semantics. But Auburn your not the only intuitive person here (far from it) and though I’m too socially inept to effectively manipulate, I do posses the ability to perceive the metaphorical devil on your shoulder, that supposedly secret part of you that can’t help but be proud of your manipulative prowess, that wants to blur the distinction between the acceptable and the immoral, that would have you reject your moral values and embrace your darker potential.
Doesn’t it all seem so easy?

Eventually you’ll discover this is all for naught, because believe it or not, like it or not, you are an inherently good person, and no matter how much you lie to yourself this will never change, you simply lack the neurosis of evil.

Perhaps you should look into hypnosis, it is to manipulation what intelligence is to wit.
Similar in many aspects, but distinct all the same.

 

[beastie]

I was talking about this the other day. Many think that being able to read peoples thoughts would be great. I think it would be the biggest burden. Im fairly "clued" to the responses, reactions etc of others and can pretty much determine what someone has done, could do or will do - this is bad enough. I dont know how I do it but its very frustrating to those around me (my son thinks I have a spy and has pestered me to tell him who it is).
In regards to what you are saying, I too feel that somehow I could be manipulating people by "knowing" how they will respond, react or act. It becomes very difficult to interact without "influencing" the other person, especially when Im seeking a desired outcome.
This sounds so pompous but it is something I am aware of all the time and I dont necessarily like it.

 

[Auburn]

Heh, careful Ore, I may just take that advice seriously. If it was guaranteed to me that I could not reach malevolence regardless of what I did, I might just take advantage of that and "explore" without any restraints.

I mean, who doesn't have some level of curiosity for the darker things in life? And considering I am first a seeker of knowledge, I don't consider any knowledge as "forbidden" or not worth knowing. Being well acquainted with the dark is a necessity for someone who seeks knowledge in all aspects of existence.

 

[Cognisant]

Heh, careful Ore, I may just take that advice seriously. If it was guaranteed to me that I could not reach malevolence regardless of what I did, I might just take advantage of that and "explore" without any restraints.

I give encouragement, but no guarantees.

 

[Chimera]

Oh my.
Well, you know how contorted my thoughts are on manipulation, but...I'll try to put a few things into words. ​

Say you were a psychic/genius, aware of every outcome that could result from interacting with someone; you know exactly how everyone will react if you say/do this or the other; would it be possible not to manipulate others?

​

No.
I think of it like...you've cracked the pattern of a string of numbers; now whenever you stumble upon that pattern, you'll recognize it. After you recognize a system, and are reminded of its presence every day (assuming you have interaction with people daily), how frigging hard would it be to simply ignore its existence? Unless a person were gifted (cursed?) with selective ignorance, I'd say it's impossible. You don't simply forget.
"Oh, you don't have to forget it," some people might argue. "You just have to choose not to use it."
How does that work? If every interaction you have is coupled with split-second understandings of multiple action/reaction scenarios that you can't turn off, how do you not acknowledge them? ​

The problem isn't manipulation itself. It is the common (mis?)perception that manipulation is bad. Perhaps it stems from the fact that we value sincerety and freedom above many things; we wouldn't want to be insincere nor rob someone of their freedom. (Because sometimes it seems like "Hey, if I expect them to X, and I do something to better the chance of that happening, then I have just forced them to X.")
Everyone has influence on others. Influence itself is a form of unintentional manipulation, in my definition, and it happens without our control.
So a few people are equipped to recognize that influence and map out common responses to certain actions they take. They can integrate personal knowledge of a person to better predict reactions.
Isn't that just another skill, one more card to play in the game of social interaction? Are we bound by morals to deny a natural skill? Why?​

Why, indeed...speaking from personal experience:
Manipulation with conscience is a terrible burden of faux responsibility. It has worn me down incredibly in the past. Realizing I could indeed manipulate people into feeling a certain way or doing a certain thing brought immense guilt: If I had this skill to make people happy if I wished, why wasn't I doing it all the time? Even if the manipulation itself was taxing to me, why wouldn't I be selfless and put other peoples' happiness first? Was it really that they just didn't matter to me? What a terrible person I was, to deny them happiness, however brief!
I don't know how I broke that mentality. Maybe I just stopped listening to that part of my conscience. Maybe I just stopped caring. ​

What is a conscience anyway? Is it just how you think you should act, based on a collection of values that don't necessarily coincide with your first reaction--​

Okay, stopping. I think I've taken up enough space with rambling. >>;​

 

[Ermine]

I can relate with the OP. Most people are pretty predictable. But as to whether manipulation is a good or bad thing, I believe it's neutral. You can manipulate someone for better or worse. I'd go as far as saying that in social situations, we are expected to manipulate. What I mean by this is that we will greet other people to make them feel acknowledged. We will listen to whatever they have to say to make them feel better. We will keep eye contact to make them feel important and listened to. We don't typically reveal our negative emotions when someone asks "how are you doing?" to make them feel content. This is common, benign stuff but chock full of benign manipulation.

I don't think you have to worry about manipulation being unethical until it moves them to do or say something you know they don't want to say or do. Stuff like insisting they love a career path they hate, or encouraging suicidal thoughts. Stuff like that.

And on the hierarchy of happiness vs. truth, I generally go for truth. However, I think that in nearly all situations, truth and happiness can be achieved through proper benign manipulation. For example, if my friend were to ask me "does this dress make me look fat?" and I know she's sensitive about her weight and can't take a straightforward answer, I wouldn't flat out tell her that it makes her look fat. Instead, I would tell her that it looks nice, but that I bet I could find a dress that looks even better on her. Thus both truth and happiness are satisfied.

But at the same time, it's hard to handle such situations since I seem to love and cherish truth more than the average person.

 

[cheese]

I understood the post immediately as well (I think). This is something I've been struggling with as well.

Working within common moral framework:

The first thing I'd say is - awareness is not wrong in itself. All of us work towards particular outcomes. If you happen to have 'cracked the code', as chimera said, you're simply more clued in to what happens naturally. You've got more data. So what?

'Manipulation', like 'selfish' and 'love', is one of those words whose meaning has been multiplied and therefore muddied by indiscriminate use. Manipulation in the sense of conscious influence is almost impossible to avoid. The ability to mentally simulate possible scenarios and perform cost-benefit analysis is part of what makes us higher-order animals. The moral questions appear only when determining the distribution of benefit and the level of awareness of all parties involved. Most people seem to conflate unscrupulous use of this mental tool - involving elements of deception/misrepresentation in order to maximise benefit to self at the expense of others - with the tool itself. It is impossible not to have an effect on the world. Does the ability to direct your effect make you evil? Of course not. It's the actions you choose that do.

I can't tell you which actions are good, or bad, or whether you're responsible for anyone's happiness. These are things everyone has to work out for themselves, I think. (An example: I personally wouldn't draw the parallel you did between providing happiness and providing water, for various reasons.) You have to go right back to first principles, axioms you believe without question - or at least with inadequate doubt to impair daily functioning - and work out your own coherent moral system from there. All we can do is the best we can, according to what we think is right. We truly cannot do any more than that.

 

[KazeCraven]

In short, too many people to satisfy who are no more worthy to be a recipient of good than said intuitive.

Now on to my long-winded analysis.

What is the ultimate good? Happiness? I think not. There's more to life than being happy. Happiness is good, certainly, but likely not the ultimate good.

Is truth the ultimate good? Perhaps, though what is good and what is not is not clear either.

Let's pretend for a moment that happiness is the ultimate good. We should not only maximize happiness of every person but also seek ways to learn how to maximize happiness, correct? For if one possesses the ability to learn how to make others happy isn't he also at fault if he does not attempt to learn how to do such a thing? As with the jug of water and the thirsting infant, one also ought to seek water if he does not currently possess it.

Going further, imagine omniscient intuitive knows that one person would be unfathomably happy if the intuitive married said person. Should the intuitive marry this person and feign love, even assuming that the intuitive would not overtime hurt his partner as the truth about their relationship slips out? If there are three such people, who should be granted unfathomable happiness? Simply the one that would be most happy? When do the needs of the intuitive come into play? Assuming happiness is the greatest good, I would assert that no one, including the intuitive, is more or less deserving of happiness than any other person precisely because the greatest good is the maximization of happiness itself. From there there is no paradox because the intuitive seeks happiness both for himself and others.

Less than omniscient intuitive does not know what, exactly, will maximize happiness but does know more about what will maximize happiness for himself than for others so his goal is to seek ways to maximize happiness for those he can help, and he is much more able to help generate happiness for others if he himself is happy. So while he may do many insincere things to aid others, his net happiness is always positive. But he avoids lying on principle because a lie that reveals itself later invalidates, if not causes more harm than, the original good intention. And since he cannot know what leads to happiness due to high complexity of all the different decisions, he must seek truth until he is able to learn how best to generate happiness.

Why is manipulation bad anyway? Manipulation is simply short-circuiting the process of giving power to others to decide if they want to do what you want them to do by taking their decision (and thus their power) out of the equation. Being insincere or lying might be bad, but manipulation itself doesn't require being insincere.

I'm not sure where exactly I wanted to go with my response, but I'll end with stating that in lieu of knowing what the ultimate good is the search for truth is the greatest good one can hope to seek. However, as truth can be discovered through being untruthful, telling the truth is not necessarily the greatest good. And I've referred to "good" far too many times in this post, especially considering it is such a vague word.

 

[Da Blob]

You know some people would be quite insulted if one did not attempt to manipulate them. It would mean (to them) that one had no use for them, which can be seen as a incredible insult.

So we prefer to manipulate words instead of people, one has to realize that puts us into a rare minority of humans. I have a brother, who is quite intelligent, but because he had ADHD, he failed in an academic environment. He focused his genius on learning how to manipulate others instead of words and mathematical symbols. He pretty much can impose his will on any given target. It is a good thing for the world that he lacks patience....

I have noticed that it is quite often those with low self-esteem that are the most manipulative. They do not believe that they have the talents and skills necessary to achieve their goals, so they dedicate themselves to affiliations with those who can provide that which is desired.

As a counselor, it is my job to be 'manipulative'. I would hope that my motivation, though, is not primarily selfish, but that manipulation is simply a matter of guidance not domination. To "inspire" was always my ideal form of manipulation.

Face it, we have been the targets/victims of manipulation since we arrived in this world. It seems to be the basic currency for most of social interactions. I referred he who was once known as Cog the Magnificent to the work of Eric Berne, who postulated that all human intercourse was a transaction of some kind. Manipulation is just one form of "trans - action" between humans...

 

[Auburn]

I realize that rationally speaking, manipulation, just as everything else, is neither good or bad. It is up to one's subjective conscience to decide what type of manipulation is good and what is evil.

As for my own conscience, I think my dislike for it is something along the lines of "who am I to do this to them?". It seems like a disrespect and insult for me to have such control over others; to belittle them into a sort of puppet; regardless of my intent.

If I am the most aware of the people present at that time, they are at the mercy of my morality.
​

Yet I guess it's true that we can't avoid influencing people, and we should instead embrace the ability to do so - and trust our own judgment to not abuse of that power. This still feels wrong to me but I realize it's an irrational value I have to break.

Another value that I sense I need to beak is the belief that granting myself happiness is selfish and therefore wrong. As KazeCraven said, at some point the intuitive's needs must also be taken into consideration. Still, this is one value I am extremely hesitant to break. I do not trust myself without it there to restrict me, but I guess I'll have to - for my own sake.

I can feel myself getting more evil as I write this.
​

It seems most of you agree that it is justified to manipulate others if it is for their own happiness. But is it also justified to manipulate others for your own happiness? Perhaps it is justified if done in moderation? Perhaps if it's done in proportion to the level of happiness you grant others? Perhaps it is justified if it is not at the expense of anyone else's happiness?

 

[Decaf]

Some deep questions...

I can't say that I've found suitable answers for them either, but remember that excluding all forms of manipulation or pleasure seeking is black and white thinking. Any idea taken to its logical extremes is ridiculous. Allowing for moderation is important in all things, even violence or disrespect.

We have a habit of wanting to construct our principles are concrete and unchangeable, like the laws of physics. At some point you have to trust your own perception of the present to make the vital modifications to your principles. Sure, define a few benchmarks to make sure you haven't gotten on too much of a roll in the wrong direction, but trust yourself to not change into someone who doesn't care whether or not they are good.

 

[Kuu]

Disjointed thoughts ahead:

Awareness = "familiar with the darkside"

You cannot escape the burden of choice by trying to find the "good" action, thus removing guilt by surrendering to an absolute ideal of least harm.. Because every "good" action has a dark backside, unavoidable. Your very existence is a limit or a burden or harms someone else; every action favors something/one over something/one else. Love hurts. Life kills. Altruism is selfish. Being honest is as manipulative as lying. All blessings are curses.

Good or evil ... is not possible. Good and evil.... well it then makes little sense to make the distinction... one must drop these useless concepts altogether...

Happiness brought forth from manipulation is superficial, transitory, and inevitable... as is the harm it causes.

You can only make yourself happy, by being at peace with the choices you make, at peace with the harm you are inevitably causing through your choices.... you must accept that pain is essential to existence. Otherwise the weight of your guilt will eventually drown you in the sea of gray morality.

You cannot force other people to be happy, happiness has to come from within themselves. No matter how much "companionship" or "help"... we're ultimately alone on this one.


And happiness does not imply absence of pain, but acceptance of it. Absence of pain is equivalent to a vegetative state. Life is pathos. I suppose this makes me a Romantic....

 

[bluesquid]

Manipulation is fun, easy, and ensures I get what I want.

I want to be left alone for the most part, so "knowing" helps me steer the situation. i dont want to dominate everything, so I dont feel Im a problem.

I think I live quite ethically. Not because im moral or just. Not karma. I worry. I think every action has unintended consequences. Bad actions have bad unintended consequences. i dont like those too much.

Like riding a motorcycle. How do the people that own them rationalize "high incidence of death or mutilation"? I will never get on one. Too dangerous. Well so is manipulation.

Mostly I do it to make myself smile.

At my coffee shop, they have a whiteboard with a question of the day. Answer correctly, you get a free coffee or bagel.

So im 3rd in line, and Im behind a girl who has some things, including an OJ. The question of the day was,

"Whats the number one industry in Florida" I know the answer, I lived in florida.

So, i catch her attention, look right at the OJ and say, "you should answer the question and get something free"

she smiles, laughs nervously, and moves up to pay. As shes paying she says, "the answer is oranges", and the guy says "no"

she leaves, I move up, say, "tourism", and only have to pay for my bearclaw. chuckled for 5 mins.

 

[bluesquid]

YouTube- Peter Collett's Body Talk: Power

is a good intro.

Then buy his book.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553814591/ref=ox_ya_oh_product

perfect it.

 

[Cavallier]

Preface: I read everybody's comments, mark the ones I want to highlight, then make responses in my head. However, when I go to actually type the response I forget what I wanted to say...argh!

You know some people would be quite insulted if one did not attempt to manipulate them. It would mean (to them) that one had no use for them, which can be seen as a incredible insult.

It seems to be the basic currency for most of social interactions. I referred he who was once known as Cog the Magnificent to the work of Eric Berne, who postulated that all human intercourse was a transaction of some kind. Manipulation is just one form of "trans - action" between humans...

*floored* I knew there was a reason I respected that guy from time to time.

I...I actually agree with Blobby on this one. It's twisted but true that if you don't make an effort to manipulate in a given social interaction then the other party feels insignificant or even abused in many cases. It's a game of manipulation that if you suddenly walk away from it the other party feels left behind.

Example: Sometimes my friend will playfully pout if I or any of her other friends offend her. We then realize that we've offended her and playfully bow and scrape to prove that we are remorseful. It's a little thing that I suspect outsiders would see as odd or actually take seriously. She would come off as easily offended and childish to others but I intuitively know it's a game. If she were truly offended she would not pout and I would genuinely apologize. However, if she were to pout and I simply ignored her and didn't manipulate in return she would then become truly offended. This is an ungainly example but I think it proves my point.

I also agree that it's the currency of social interactions. But I think there is an important point to be made here: Yes, we can be manipulative and we manipulate intentionally and unintentionally but that does not mean the other person is actually manipulated. I'm currently working in customer service and manipulation is par for the course. I'm trying to get somebody to buy something (be it a product or just a line of "I'm here to make your life easier" BS) but that doesn't mean they always buy it. Customers attempt to manipulate me all the time. I know they are doing it and most of the time I let them because it makes them feel like they are winning something and it gives them the happy glowing warmth of superiority. (Hey, I hadn't even thought about the fact that I am manipulating them into thinking they have manipulated me...interesting.)

Here's my dark side:

I think that if the masses are going to be dumb enough to be completely taken in by my manipulation then I don't really see why I should feel guilty because the kind of manipulation I pawn is the small time grease the gets me and everyone around me through our social interactions with ease. This excludes those who are incapable of understanding manipulation of course. By my own moral compass I will not manipulate others into harm intentionally...unless I really think they deserve it ....damn. I really am evil aren't I?

Anyway, I think the idea of Auburn being an evil manipulator is interesting. Are you secretly a bunny killer that's actually quite gregarious? Hmmmmm? You have a long haired white cat don't you?

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

First I want to say to Cavalier.......Blobby? . Looks like someone has a new nickname!

Second I want to ask: What exactly are we trying to get at here? Learning how to be better manipulators? How to stop being manipulators since we all are to some degree?

After the OP went up, I spent some time here and there thinking about how I manipulate others and thought, Wow! I'm pretty good at it when I want to be. I hadn't really thought about it specifically but I don't feel all that guilty about most of it. I haven't manipulated anyone into any harm that I aware of but since manipulation is perhaps the most integral part of human interaction, how much should we hold ourselves accountable if something goes wrong? Our individual manipulations are only just a part of what happens to others.

 

[warryer]

haha bluesquid you douchebag. but I agree it can be fun to twist this stuff around for a laugh. what I hate is that nobody else can really share in it.

I have to ask though, was there some sort of decision involved: one day you decided im going to try out this manipulation thing.

Auburn:

I am sitting on the same problem as you. Who am I to be the one to influence another? Of course as we discovered earlier influence cannot be avoided. Going out and actively influencing people is what's difficult.

I have been tossing this one around for quite some time. I know exactly what you mean when you say you feel yourself growing more evil as you think about it.

Manipulation feels so dirty.

I think the problem lies in the fact that we attribute manipulation to what petty highschool girls do. I think with a goal in mind manipulation suddenly seems less like a taboo and more like a helpful tool.

Maybe its better to think along the lines of Darwinism, the force that drives all living things. When was Darwinism ever fair? Those who were the best were the ones who were allowed to live. Why shouldn't we use our "weapons?" However in this day and age natural selection isn't the case as much as social selection. Manipulation seems to be a weapon of survival of social evolution.

No it doesn't feel fair at all and that is the dilemma: do I crush my competition utterly because I can? or do I give them a fighting chance so they don't feel worthless?

One of my problems in dealing with manipulation is that I am usually too detached to exert my influence... Now if there are girls involved I feel like Rambo.

 

[Auburn]

What exactly are we trying to get at here? Learning how to be better manipulators?

Yeah... I have no idea really.
But if you'd like to start a "how to manipulate" guide, that we can all add to, go for it. It'd be interesting to see what tricks we all know - although a lot of them are extremely situational and much too subtle to articulate properly.

@ Cavallier - Very interesting take on the "currency of social interaction". I have some thoughts floating around related to this but nothing solid enough to post.

The Dark Side - It does seem rather intp to be aware of our own darkness doesn't it. I doubt many innocent intps exist - if innocence is defined as not possessing awareness of the more sinful truth pertaining to oneself and the rest of humanity.

I learned many manipulative tricks when I spent one summer as a colporteur, and also more from preaching - so I can relate to your current occupation. Still I probably came across as more skilled in the first post than I really am.

@ Warryer - Manipulation as our ace and weapon in the Darwinistic view of the world; I think there may be more truth to that than I am willing to admit. Humanity is manipulative by nature just as predators are savages by nature. Our form of survival just appears a bit less barbaric but it's the same principles, isn't it..
And congrats on 100 posts!

 

[Agent Intellect]

Everything we do and say could be construed as manipulation - it's similar to saying "don't think about dog shit", because you are going to think about it, meaning I have just manipulated your thoughts. The very act of making other people aware of your presence is altering their thought patterns.

Perhaps, though, if we are thinking about it on a Darwinian analogue, there are manipulative predators and prey, and some people are more intuitive about the thoughts of others, making them the predators. Perhaps SJ's are the droving herds of manipulative prey, and the defense that they have evolved is being stubborn, myopic, and obsessed with tradition, thereby making them impervious to the "logic" utilized in an attempt to manipulate them?

It also might be interesting to think about the ability for a meme to manipulate as being the meme with the most fitness. Different memes are more likely to alter the thought patterns of people - and probably various memes will affect various individuals (and even personality types) in different ways. So, with that in mind, one would only have to know the sorts of memes that are best suited for manipulating someone into doing what they want.

 

[Da Blob]

First I want to say to Cavalier.......Blobby? . Looks like someone has a new nickname!

Second I want to ask: What exactly are we trying to get at here? Learning how to be better manipulators? How to stop being manipulators since we all are to some degree?

EEK! Paranoid Moment - that actually is my nickname, known to only a few of the "Elite Brotherhood", The Psi Upsilon Omega and its groupies. I did not even notice it, because that is how most of my emails are addressed... (re: Hey Blobby, )

I think that one possible goal, of the thread
is to define the insidious role, that we led
for manipulation plays
on the interpersonal stage
The part of our dark character, we Dread

Alas, it is quite possible to divide humanity into Predators and Prey. Social Predators are quite adept at manipulation, I guess it depends on where wants to be in the "Food Chain". I opt for omnivore, myself...

 

[bluesquid]

Everything we do and say could be construed as manipulation - it's similar to saying "don't think about dog shit", because you are going to think about it, meaning I have just manipulated your thoughts. The very act of making other people aware of your presence is altering their thought patterns.

Perhaps, though, if we are thinking about it on a Darwinian analogue, there are manipulative predators and prey, and some people are more intuitive about the thoughts of others, making them the predators. Perhaps SJ's are the droving herds of manipulative prey, and the defense that they have evolved is being stubborn, myopic, and obsessed with tradition, thereby making them impervious to the "logic" utilized in an attempt to manipulate them?

It also might be interesting to think about the ability for a meme to manipulate as being the meme with the most fitness. Different memes are more likely to alter the thought patterns of people - and probably various memes will affect various individuals (and even personality types) in different ways. So, with that in mind, one would only have to know the sorts of memes that are best suited for manipulating someone into doing what they want.

The best post I have read since joining. Ex fucking squisite.

As for when i started manipulating? dont know. Its somewhat like a distinct memory of mine. I was 5 and flying from florida to NY. It was raining, and I overheard someone say it would be snowing when we landed. The entire flight I looked out the window for the line that differentiated the snow from the rain. I now know that is silly, but i cant tell you when I learned the truth.

I do remember a very explorative period in my life. I was 7 and I lied about everything. Didnt have an aim, just lied. No I have an aim, but dont have to lie.

I love being a INTP

 

[asdfasdfasdfsdf]

i am not, in any way, shape, or form.. manipulative ...

 

[Darby]

Wow, I got into this question late. Anyways, I would like to say that I understand completely, even if a response I make seems to not have anything to do with what you were saying, I might not have expressed my ideas properly. I did not read all of the responses, but I shall soon, I thought it would be right to make a quick response and edit later.

Anyways, to your question on whether or not it is possible to do something without manipulating someone intentionally gets a bit into a discussion we had in my ethics class about Altruism and whether it exists or not, personally I say no, even if acting for the wellbeing of another is done, there is always (even if not intentional/conscious) an expectation of reciprocal effect(but that's just opinion at this point, I have no evidence).

On happiness it gets fuzzy for me, I have always been taught not to lie, and at the same time to always do my best to make everyone happy, often the two conflict and ultimately I think it depends entirely on how much happiness they would get out of how big/small the lie is. If the lie is small(literally almost harmless and they couldn't possibly find out that you lied) and the happiness payoff(predicted at least) is huge, then why not? the problem is that the world isn't quite so B/W so in a situation where the payoff is medium, and the lie is medium(meaning they could possibly find out, and be unhappy about it) then the answer is no, I don't believe it is good to lie, because it is entirely possible that they will find out, and the likelihood of them being more sad by knowing you lied than if you had just told them in the first place is huge(although this depends entirely on how close you are to the person, a close friend is more likely to be deeply wounded by a lie than an aquaintance, but even this assumes they do not understand why you lied). The premise is DON'T LIE, there is too much wierd crap around it, and I realized just now that everything I just said about probabilies gets thrown out the window after remembering that you can like read minds and sh*t, the answer is still no for me, but utimately it is up to you, my moral code cannot dictate yours.

 

[walfin]

I was once slightly acquainted with someone who wanted to come up with a table for manipulating people based on MBTI type. It freaked me out, so I told that person that it wouldn't work, although I felt otherwise (it might actually help, with some practice, though I'm sure the "fakeness" could be detected). The worst thing would be that an INTP could come up with that sort of thing but his/her tool would be used against him/herself.

As you manipulate others, you are, yourself, being manipulated. Careful there.

Good hunting, you folks, and stay safe.

 

[Logician]

I consider myself very intuitive, and normally can identify problems with peoples psychology, personality, character, etc... fairly quickly. From here i do consciously manipulate, but my manipulation is a attempt to fix their problems, present to them ways of thinking that will counteract the problem without them realizing that that is what i am doing. Or at least this is what i try to do, in fact i become distressed if i feel the person is beyond help or seems to not accept my rational due to their own self-deception. if i feel the person is intelligent or rational enough i may just confront them directly.

for example, if i come across a person who is behaving immaturely, i will first try to manipulate their perception of me so that they will respect me, then try to alter this image to what i want them to become so that they will gravitate towards it, then directly bring up the issues i saw earlier in a indirect manner and explain why those ways are foolish, or immature, or whatnot.

 

[Vrecknidj]

I realize that rationally speaking, manipulation, just as everything else, is neither good or bad. It is up to one's subjective conscience to decide what type of manipulation is good and what is evil.

Can you realize something that is false? What if it's not true? What if it isn't up to your subjective conscience to decide what type of manipulation is good and which is evil?

As for my own conscience, I think my dislike for it is something along the lines of "who am I to do this to them?". It seems like a disrespect and insult for me to have such control over others; to belittle them into a sort of puppet; regardless of my intent.

If I am the most aware of the people present at that time, they are at the mercy of my morality.
​

Yet I guess it's true that we can't avoid influencing people, and we should instead embrace the ability to do so - and trust our own judgment to not abuse of that power. This still feels wrong to me but I realize it's an irrational value I have to break.

Why does it feel wrong? How about this: "It feels wrong to you, so, it feels wrong to you." What's wrong? Why can't your feelings be what they are, and just be okay?

It seems most of you agree that it is justified to manipulate others if it is for their own happiness. But is it also justified to manipulate others for your own happiness? Perhaps it is justified if done in moderation? Perhaps if it's done in proportion to the level of happiness you grant others? Perhaps it is justified if it is not at the expense of anyone else's happiness?

This is a common INTP-trait, isn't it? This obsessive need to justify everything. What happens when you step back and give up trying to justify?



Dave

 

[Auburn]

Can you realize something that is false? What if it's not true? What if it isn't up to your subjective conscience to decide what type of manipulation is good and which is evil?

Then what would it be up to? "Good" and "evil" are, and have always been, subjective terms, regardless of what they are referring to. Ultimately it's each individual person's subjective conscience to decide what is good/bad - but the objective reality is that manipulation is neither of them.

Why does it feel wrong? How about this: "It feels wrong to you, so, it feels wrong to you." What's wrong? Why can't your feelings be what they are, and just be okay?

Because it's those very feelings of "this is wrong" that also tell me "this is not ok". However, I've since overcome this, and accepted the fact that I shouldn't feel this way, and don't anymore.

This is a common INTP-trait, isn't it? This obsessive need to justify everything. What happens when you step back and give up trying to justify?

For me, I momentarily lose sight of my own identity. It has to do with integrity to one's values, and giving up on one's own values results in a confusion of who you are. Now to examine those values and change them as you see fit is different than just giving up on them completely. One leads to personal development/growth while the other leads to internal chaos..

..i think...

 

[Vrecknidj]

I'm not convinced that good and evil are entirely subjective. I've read at least a hundred arguments but I still don't see it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for some kind of definition of good that is stifling (there's too much of that, not only from the religions of the world, but from most of the humanitarian perspectives as well).

I do think that the more we understand, the more we will come to see that there's more to "good" than we thought...

Dave