The Third Person Effect

Buddy

The Living Force
Haven't finished the whole thread yet, but this is what I get from the very first post:

Laura said:
Book said:
When the Third Person Effect leads you to condone censorship, take a step back and imagine the sort of messages people on the other side might think are brainwashing you, and then ask yourself if those messages should be censored too.

Exactly. This seems to be an example of something I've referred to previously like: "seeing what other people don't see" and the obviousness (to me) of what's going on sometimes makes me so mad I feel like I could scream.

When I see stuff like the censorship issue from "concerned" others, my attention doesn't immediately turn in to introspect or to think about what's being said. Instead, I continue looking at the whole post, article, propaganda piece, person talking or whatever it is until I "get" the full "cognitive loopback effect", or "all the available ways of looking at it" that I'm capable of ATM.

This "full effect" is just seeing how the source person or group (PTB, influencers, others concerned about censorship, propaganda, brainwashing, etc) doesn't see one point David is making here: Why would people in positions of influence be concerned about "possible brainwashing" of "vulnerable others" if brainwashing didn't really work? And if brainwashing does work, then why aren't these influencers afraid that their own "attempts to influence" won't be seen as brainwashing attempts and backfire on them? And why aren't they afraid their very concerns, themselves, might not be seen by others as examples of the influencers own brainwash?

Possible answer: The influencers can very well be brainwashed people afraid that others will become brainwashed before the influencers have a chance to brainwash with their own stuff, which may even include brainwashing people to believe they are not brainwashed.

Does this kind of craziness have a tendency to make other members feel kind of sick in the tummy like it does me?

I think this is a good study to introduce and a good thread for teaching us how to locate and see around our blindspots, but I'm not sure yet. Third Person Effect and self-serving bias seem to be powerful indeed. Thank goodness the C's Experiment is anti-Sacred Cow!
 

transientP

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
This "full effect" is just seeing how the source person or group (PTB, influencers, others concerned about censorship, propaganda, brainwashing, etc) doesn't see one point David is making here: Why would people in positions of influence be concerned about "possible brainwashing" of "vulnerable others" if brainwashing didn't really work? And if brainwashing does work, then why aren't these influencers afraid that their own "attempts to influence" won't be seen as brainwashing attempts and backfire on them? And why aren't they afraid their very concerns, themselves, might not be seen by others as examples of the influencers own brainwash?

good points Buddy.

if it doesn't work, why be scared of it ?

i think the manipulator/s don't like to be looked at directly. it doesn't like its methods to be pointed out. which would makes sense, since if more people were to become aware of, and accept that said methods were a reality and furthermore, were actually being implemented, people could become empowered by the very fact of knowing. knowing and not staying naive.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
It's pretty clear that, as pathocrats, they KNOW brainwashing works and they want to have the monopoly on it. What's more, they must be consciously aware of this.
 

transientP

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
It's pretty clear that, as pathocrats, they KNOW brainwashing works and they want to have the monopoly on it. What's more, they must be consciously aware of this.

as they want to have the monopoly on everything possible.
resources, ideas, inventions, opinions etc'.
i guess that's what happens when wishful thinking goes to the extreme... wanting to control everything.
it's greed and fear run amok.
 

SeekinTruth

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
transientP said:
It's pretty clear that, as pathocrats, they KNOW brainwashing works and they want to have the monopoly on it. What's more, they must be consciously aware of this.

as they want to have the monopoly on everything possible.
resources, ideas, inventions, opinions etc'.
i guess that's what happens when wishful thinking goes to the extreme... wanting to control everything.
it's greed and fear run amok.

First I totally agree with Laura about the Pathocrats. Second, what transientP wrote is somewhat reassuring. This insane wish to control everything, even with the hypothesized 4D controllers, is pretty much impossible. So as extreme as the "Terror of the Situation" is, at least we know that their wishes can't be realized -- no matter how much damage they cause. The Universe is about balance and there can't be any more STS than already exists.
 

transientP

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
yes. it's wishful thinking.

it's impossible to control everything. there are just too many variables on too many scales seen and unseen.
complex chaotic systems interpenetrate each other in nature everywhere..

this reminds me of ecology and all those crazy studies that were going on back in the day. some ecologists were trying to measure every single thing in a given environment and feed the data into a computer, but they never succeeded in creating a model that predicted the system's change adequately.

i can't recall who it was at the moment that conducted those experiments but here's the wiki page for the history of ecology for anyone interested;
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ecology#The_ecosystem

i guess by the time you can see everything, and not just what you want to be there, you will have already by then overcome this need to possess and control everything.. ?
 

pete02

The Living Force
Laura said:
From Wikipedia:

A self-serving bias occurs when people attribute their successes to internal or personal factors but attribute their failures to situational factors beyond their control. The self-serving bias can be seen in the common human tendency to take credit for success but to deny responsibility for failure. It may also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way that is beneficial to their interests. Self-serving bias may be associated with the better-than-average effect, in which individuals are biased to believe that they typically perform better than the average person in areas important to their self-esteem.[citation needed] This effect, also called "illusory superiority", has been found when people rate their own driving skill, social sensitivity, leadership ability and many other attributes.

From AllPsycheonline:

Self-Serving Bias

Description


This is our tendency to take credit for success (self-enhancing bias) and deny any responsibility for failure (self-protective bias).

This helps to protect our ego. It also enables us to confirm that we are meeting our goals.

We will tend to be less self-serving if other needs interrupt, for example if we are subject to public scrutiny.

Group-serving bias happens at group level, in the same way.

Example

I am proud of my good exam results except for the failure in one subject where I was unfortunately rather ill on the day of the examination.

Using it

Set the other person up to succeed at something and then let them take credit. They will feel good and be more amenable to your requests. Or let them take the credit and then subtly blackmail them.

Defending

Be honest. Do not take credit when you do not deserve it. You will gain more credibility.

Wow :shock: I'm a sure candidate for this type of behavior. Especially the last two (Using it and Defending). Here I thought I was just being more of an honest/decent person but I never thought to look at it this way. This thread is sure to be an eye opener for me. Thanks for the thread and I'll be watching it closely.
 

webglider

Dagobah Resident
Below are some examples of popular propaganda techniques. It may be fun to start a new thread identifying examples of such techniques and posting them. I do believe that one can confer immunity on oneself by doing this.

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm

Propaganda Techniques
Assertion:
Assertion is commonly used in advertising and modern propaganda. An assertion is an enthusiastic or energetic statement presented as a fact, although it is not necessarily true. They often imply that the statement requires no explanation or back up, but that it should merely be accepted without question. Examples of assertion, although somewhat scarce in wartime propaganda, can be found often in modern advertising propaganda. Any time an advertiser states that their product is the best without providing evidence for this, they are using an assertion. The subject, ideally, should simply agree to the statement without searching for additional information or reasoning. Assertions, although usually simple to spot, are often dangerous forms of propaganda because they often include falsehoods or lies.

Bandwagon:

Bandwagon is one of the most common techniques in both wartime and peacetime and plays an important part in modern advertising. Bandwagon is also one of the seven main propaganda techniques identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis in 1938. Bandwagon is an appeal to the subject to follow the crowd, to join in because others are doing so as well. Bandwagon propaganda is, essentially, trying to convince the subject that one side is the winning side, because more people have joined it. The subject is meant to believe that since so many people have joined, that victory is inevitable and defeat impossible. Since the average person always wants to be on the winning side, he or she is compelled to join in. However, in modern propaganda, bandwagon has taken a new twist. The subject is to be convinced by the propaganda that since everyone else is doing it, they will be left out if they do not. This is, effectively, the opposite of the other type of bandwagon, but usually provokes the same results. Subjects of bandwagon are compelled to join in because everyone else is doing so as well. When confronted with bandwagon propaganda, we should weigh the pros and cons of joining in independently from the amount of people who have already joined, and, as with most types of propaganda, we should seek more information.

Card stacking:

Card stacking, or selective omission, is one of the seven techniques identified by the IPA, or Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It involves only presenting information that is positive to an idea or proposal and omitting information contrary to it. Card stacking is used in almost all forms of propaganda, and is extremely effective in convincing the public. Although the majority of information presented by the card stacking approach is true, it is dangerous because it omits important information. The best way to deal with card stacking is to get more information.

Glittering Generalities:

Glittering generalities was one of the seven main propaganda techniques identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis in 1938. It also occurs very often in politics and political propaganda. Glittering generalities are words that have different positive meaning for individual subjects, but are linked to highly valued concepts. When these words are used, they demand approval without thinking, simply because such an important concept is involved. For example, when a person is asked to do something in "defense of democracy" they are more likely to agree. The concept of democracy has a positive connotation to them because it is linked to a concept that they value. Words often used as glittering generalities are honor, glory, love of country, and especially in the United States, freedom. When coming across with glittering generalities, we should especially consider the merits of the idea itself when separated from specific words.

Lesser of Two Evils:

The "lesser of two evils" technique tries to convince us of an idea or proposal by presenting it as the least offensive option. This technique is often implemented during wartime to convince people of the need for sacrifices or to justify difficult decisions. This technique is often accompanied by adding blame on an enemy country or political group. One idea or proposal is often depicted as one of the only options or paths. When confronted with this technique, the subject should consider the value of any proposal independently of those it is being compared with.

Name Calling:

Name calling occurs often in politics and wartime scenarios, but very seldom in advertising. It is another of the seven main techniques designated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It is the use of derogatory language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labeling the target something that the public dislikes. Often, name calling is employed using sarcasm and ridicule, and shows up often in political cartoons or writings. When examining name calling propaganda, we should attempt to separate our feelings about the name and our feelings about the actual idea or proposal.

Pinpointing the Enemy:

Pinpointing the enemy is used extremely often during wartime, and also in political campaigns and debates. This is an attempt to simplify a complex situation by presenting one specific group or person as the enemy. Although there may be other factors involved the subject is urged to simply view the situation in terms of clear-cut right and wrong. When coming in contact with this technique, the subject should attempt to consider all other factors tied into the situation. As with almost all propaganda techniques, the subject should attempt to find more information on the topic. An informed person is much less susceptible to this sort of propaganda.

Plain Folks:

The plain folks propaganda technique was another of the seven main techniques identified by the IPA, or Institute for Propaganda Analysis. The plain folks device is an attempt by the propagandist to convince the public that his views reflect those of the common person and that they are also working for the benefit of the common person. The propagandist will often attempt to use the accent of a specific audience as well as using specific idioms or jokes. Also, the propagandist, especially during speeches, may attempt to increase the illusion through imperfect pronunciation, stuttering, and a more limited vocabulary. Errors such as these help add to the impression of sincerity and spontaneity. This technique is usually most effective when used with glittering generalities, in an attempt to convince the public that the propagandist views about highly valued ideas are similar to their own and therefore more valid. When confronted by this type of propaganda, the subject should consider the proposals and ideas separately from the personality of the presenter.

Simplification (Stereotyping):

Simplification is extremely similar to pinpointing the enemy, in that it often reduces a complex situation to a clear-cut choice involving good and evil. This technique is often useful in swaying uneducated audiences. When faced with simplification, it is often useful to examine other factors and pieces of the proposal or idea, and, as with all other forms of propaganda, it is essential to get more information.

Testimonials:

Testimonials are another of the seven main forms of propaganda identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. Testimonials are quotations or endorsements, in or out of context, which attempt to connect a famous or respectable person with a product or item. Testimonials are very closely connected to the transfer technique, in that an attempt is made to connect an agreeable person to another item. Testimonials are often used in advertising and political campaigns. When coming across testimonials, the subject should consider the merits of the item or proposal independently of the person of organization giving the testimonial.

Transfer:

Transfer is another of the seven main propaganda terms first used by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis in 1938. Transfer is often used in politics and during wartime. It is an attempt to make the subject view a certain item in the same way as they view another item, to link the two in the subjects mind. Although this technique is often used to transfer negative feelings for one object to another, it can also be used in positive ways. By linking an item to something the subject respects or enjoys, positive feelings can be generated for it. However, in politics, transfer is most often used to transfer blame or bad feelings from one politician to another of his friends or party members, or even to the party itself. When confronted with propaganda using the transfer technique, we should question the merits or problems of the proposal or idea independently of convictions about other objects or proposals.

Bibliography

The Science of Modern Propaganda. http://www.propaganda101.com/ Last Visited: August, 2001.

Lee, Alfred McLung; Lee, Elizabeth Bryan. Propaganda Analysis. http://carmen.artsci.washington.edu/ (subdirectory). Last Visited: August, 2001.

Dorje, Carl. Propaganda Techniques. http://serendipity.magnet.ch/more/propagan.html Last Visited: August, 2001.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Esote said:
Our minds are conditioned in such a way that we may even deny being conditioned.

And hence the idea that the people can be brought to defend and even love their own slavery. It's pretty horrific because that idea is not just an idea, today it is an on-the-ground reality.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Pete said:
Wow :shock: I'm a sure candidate for this type of behavior. Especially the last two (Using it and Defending). Here I thought I was just being more of an honest/decent person but I never thought to look at it this way. This thread is sure to be an eye opener for me. Thanks for the thread and I'll be watching it closely.

I think that speaks to the pretty sure fact that a truly non-self-serving person is vanishingly rare in this world. Just about everything we do has some selfish interest behind it, which makes Gurdjieff's approach to dealing with people all the more understandable.
 

MK Scarlett

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Lilou said:
The problem is, we can't think about how we think, with the way we think. In other words, we can't see ourselves. That is why the network is so vital to continued growth. So looking at the "predator's mind" with cold hard data, and learning what "they" know about our own psychology, will at least let us glimpse this elusive predator/3rd person.

Very interesting topic.

Esote said:
Our minds are conditioned in such a way that we may even deny being conditioned. We tend to believe that people having a different point of view are the ones who are conditioned. We want to be a free individual, thinking that we are unique, when we are mostly egocentric, enslaved by our ego. And we usually pretend that we think and act by our own will, although it's mainly conformism, call it anti-conformism if you wish.
Hence the predator's mind is able to manipulate humankind with its own acceptance to play a false and tragic game.
Because of ignorance !
Thank you for this subforum, we need to learn and to practice how to be a warrior of the soul

Waiting for to read each comment (by understanding them with the barrier of languages), these gave me a first "key" to get the point here. How conditionned we are is much more than suspected. Exo & Eso.
This is a very intereresting thread, while I am reading "The Political Ponerology", it takes sense.

seek10 said:
This explains why it is difficult to explain people of evil effects of "evil foods, media control on individuals or dangers of govt. control or 911 truth".

It explains a lot and I also can experiment it from a moment.

There is so much to learn here... Actually, I get the fact a lot of people here looks know so much about everything, and I feel lost sometimes by realising all I have to learn, more and more... I know "Learn is fun" says Cassiopeans... So, I take the time necessary to include every stage, I know about some of them, but some others seems unknown to me... Work, work, work... ;)

Thank you Laura for sharing this essential topic.
 

Zadius Sky

The Living Force
Laura said:
The third-person effect is unusual because it goes against the general finding that we overestimate other people's similarity to ourselves.

This is what psychologists call the false consensus effect: we tend to assume that others hold more similar opinions and have more similar attributes and personalities to ourselves than they really do.

The third-person effect, though, goes in the other direction. When it comes to influence, instead of thinking other people are similar to us, we think they're different. There are two facets of human nature that support this exception:

* Illusion of invulnerability. People prefer to believe that they are, on average, less vulnerable than others to negative influences, like unwanted persuasion attempts. We all want to protect our sense of control over our lives. One way we do that is to assume that ads only work on other people.

* Poor self-knowledge. Although it's an unpalatable idea, we often don't know what's really going on in our own minds. Not only does this make scientific psychology a tricky enterprise, it also means that many of our intuitions about the way our own minds work are scrambled and subject to biases like the illusion of invulnerability. The effect of persuasive messages is a good example of this.

People often react to this sort of research by saying it's disheartening, which it is. It's not a happy thought that we don't know how easily we are influenced because we don't really know what's going on in our own minds.

Catching up. Indeed, I do find myself doing the above without realizing it. Thinking that a certain message or advertisement would not affect me but knowing that it would only affect others while in truth, I too am being affected. So, this thread is an eye-opening realization for me.

Thanks for fashioning this thread, Laura.
 

SeekinTruth

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Perceval said:
Esote said:
Our minds are conditioned in such a way that we may even deny being conditioned.

And hence the idea that the people can be brought to defend and even love their own slavery. It's pretty horrific because that idea is not just an idea, today it is an on-the-ground reality.

YES!! It definitely IS an on-the-ground horrific reality. It seems to have been getting worse and worse in the last few decades.

Perceval said:
Pete said:
Wow :shock: I'm a sure candidate for this type of behavior. Especially the last two (Using it and Defending). Here I thought I was just being more of an honest/decent person but I never thought to look at it this way. This thread is sure to be an eye opener for me. Thanks for the thread and I'll be watching it closely.

I think that speaks to the pretty sure fact that a truly non-self-serving person is vanishingly rare in this world. Just about everything we do has some selfish interest behind it, which makes Gurdjieff's approach to dealing with people all the more understandable.

This is something that I rarely forget nowadays. All our good intentions can be turned upside down because we don't know ourselves enough. All those underlying STS motivations that are hidden from us. The Predators Mind says it all!

And as Laura has written many times, there's a sort of "gravitational" pull on us to have STS attitudes and values as the default. Our controllers are CONSCIOUSLY STS, while we are unconsciously so for the most part.
 

Esote

Jedi Council Member
MK Scarlett said:
Actually, I get the fact a lot of people here looks know so much about everything, and I feel lost sometimes by realising all I have to learn, more and more...

We are all learning, all the time there is always more to learn. As much as we may know intellectually isn't enough. We must know with the heart and take action accordingly. Knowing little but acting with the heart is much better than knowing a lot and acting selfishly, IMO

Mod's note: Edited to fix the quotation boxes
 

RflctnOfU

Jedi Council Member
Esote said:
MK Scarlett said:
Actually, I get the fact a lot of people here looks know so much about everything, and I feel lost sometimes by realising all I have to learn, more and more...

We are all learning, all the time there is always more to learn. As much as we may know intellectually isn't enough. We must know with the heart and take action accordingly. Knowing little but acting with the heart is much better than knowing a lot and acting selfishly, IMO

Mod's note: Edited to fix the quotation boxes

I think this (bolded statement) is a somewhat 'trap-riddled-path' of an attitude. If for no other reason than that the action of manipulation is focused towards the feelings/heart.

Kris

edit: clarity
 
Top Bottom