Things that were not immediately obvious to me

Seth posted a smug-ish piece on “manipulation” the other day. He defined manipulation as: “working to spread an idea or generate an action that is not in a person’s long-term best interest”. This definition is not helpful.

The problem with Seth’s definition is that it’s impossible to determine what “a person’s long-term best interest” is. An Alinskyite leftist believes that by persuading people to organize in order to use power to force other people to give them stuff, he is helping those people. I believe that the vast majority of such beggar-thy-neighbor tactics erode the productive power of society, and ultimately leave everyone – particularly those near the organized – worse off than they would otherwise be. (As an example, I present Detroit.) Whatever your views on this particular question, I hope you agree that any definition that hinges upon such prudential judgements is meaningless.

Attempting to draw distinctions based on means, rather than ends, is equally futile. To persuade is to make an argument, to advocate. These are not even-handed or “fair” activities; they are biased, and, to someone who disagrees with your conclusions, misleading and/or deceptive.

Persuasion is a tool, to be used for good or bad ends. To attempt to define persuasion you disapprove of as somehow a different thing from persuasion you like (as Seth does with his “marketing”/”manipulation” dichotomy) is self-indulgent: It just lets you call something a nasty name. Not that that isn’t fun.

Scott Adams had an interesting piece a while back in which he argued that curiosity is a good indicator of attraction. For instance:

[I]f you ever wondered if someone is attracted to you, the answer lies in curiosity. If someone asks personal questions about your past, your plans, your likes and dislikes, that is an unambiguous sign of attraction. If someone tries to steer you into the bedroom without some conspicuous data gathering, that is a sign of simple horniness.

and:

When someone you are not attracted to talks a lot about his or her own life, you get bored to death. When someone you are attracted to talks a lot, you might find that person to be full of life, and fascinating. Attraction and curiosity are inseparable.

Let’s say you’re interviewing for a job. You wonder if the interviewer is attracted to you as a potential employee or just going through the motions. Look for the curiosity trail. If his questions are all of the typical variety, he’s probably just moving through the steps. If you sense some questions that veer off the normal path, such as asking where you like to golf, you almost certainly have something more.

Continue reading →

This is taken from the Q&A portion of a David Horowitz appearance at UCSD. As an an example of public speaking, it’s pretty awesome. Have a look, and then click through (if you’re interested) for some editorial remarks.

Continue reading →

I like the expression “inside baseball“. It’s colorful, whimsical, and expressive. It never fails to bring a smile to my face.

Language can be a real pleasure.

In reference to the American flag t-shirt/Cinco de Mayo flap, Roger Ebert tweeted:

Kids who wear American Flag t-shirts on 5 May should have to share a lunchroom table with those who wear a hammer and sickle on 4 July.

Then some people on the Internet said some mean things to him, and he really put his foot in it. If you don’t mind, I’m going to get in a late hit.

Continue reading →