Szymon's Zettelkasten
Powered by 🌱Roam GardenP: People judge mostly emotionally
Keywords:: PermanentNote
Reference: R: The Righteous Mind by Jonatan Heidt
We make intuitive judgments rapidly and we are really bad at seeking evidence that might disconfirm those initial judgments.
It's because our mind is divided into parts that have different ages. The first part is the rider (controlled processes, rational, slow, system II) and the second one is the elephant (automatic, intuitive, emotional, quick, system I). The rider evolved later and he serves the elephant.
It's really hard to overcome this tendency [1]. You can have checklists with cognitive biases and mental models that force you to rethink your judgments. However, another and often simpler method is to ask your friends to do it for you: "they can challenge you, give you reasons and arguments that sometimes trigger new intuitions, thereby making it possible for us to change our minds." (PN: What is the adjacent possible: friends can expand our adjacent possible.)
So it's good to understand that when you want to change other people's minds. You shouldn't present rational arguments, because rationalizations are a post hoc fabrication after an intuitive (emotional) judgment has been made.
Instead, you should focus on being friendly, active listening, smiling, never saying they're wrong, and so on until they like you. When they like you, they trust you, and when they trust you they will listen to your arguments.
PN: Win through your actions, never through argument: when you get into a fight, you involve people's negative emotions which closes their minds for any reasons or logic. To avoid that, keep away from direct arguments and make your point through action.
In other words, you've got to talk to their elephant. If you instead violate their intuitions, they will try to find reasons to doubt your argument. Their elephant will feel endangered and will scatter, taking the rational rider with him. You have to tame the beast before you speak to the rider—unless you want to get kicked. Always think that way when you want to persuade somebody. Your arguments don't matter unless you show empathy [4].
This quote sums it up perfectly: “And as reasoning is not the source, whence either disputant derives tenets; it is in vain to expect, that any logic, which speaks not to the affections, will ever engage him to embrace sounder principles”
Reason is not the source—a heuristic for persuasion.
Relevant notes:
- elaborate about the confirmation bias that the body has already invested resources into that initial decision and it doesn't want to change it because it would mean that the resources spent to form the first judgment were waisted.
- Never split the difference
TK P: Compression—reducing reality into narratives, categories, patterns: The rationalization may be largely the result of compression
Referenced in
PN: Control over emotions is a superpower
Moreover, never tell people they are wrong, it only fires up their negative emotions, they will try to attack you (because you're scaring away their elephant). Instead, act indirectly. Show them that they're wrong through your actions. People can't argue with that.
P: If you want to change, you need stress
I know that you know that in the long-term you will actually save energy when you change (because for instance, you will be fitter or will be making more money) but your body doesn't know that. Your body isn't good at predicting the future—it lives in the now and the now is the only thing that counts. Besides, your rational mind—the one that knows that you'll save energy in the future—is just a servant to the emotional mind and to the body (more on that here: P: People judge mostly emotionally).
P: Half of the success behind good decision-making is avoiding negative emotions
P: People judge mostly emotionally: People judge mostly emotionally. Making decisions when gripped by negative emotions only amplifies this reality.
TK PN: The ELAR framework
Emotion. We always start with emotion because almost all (if not all) decisions are quick intuitive judgments coming from our emotional parts of the brain (related: P: People judge mostly emotionally). There was a study done about people who had an illness that deprived them of emotions. Those people couldn't even decide what to wear or to eat). Yet we wrongly assume that decisions start with logic. How to trigger emotions? Loss or gain of a core desire results in positive or negative emotion. More about that here:
P: Bring the metaphysical into the physical
P: People judge mostly emotionally: we make quick intuitive judgements and later create stories to rationalize them.
PN: To persuade help the mind save energy
That said, in terms of persuasion, the meta question you should ask yourself is "how can I preserve the energy of my recipient's mind?" Their mind will most likely go with things that are energy efficient and create a story to rationalize it (related: P: People judge mostly emotionally).
R: The Black Swan by Nassim Taleb
It's the post-hoc rationalization P: People judge mostly emotionally How the fuck can we avoid these post-hoc rationalization?
P: Why can't we see Black Swans?
We use narrative to give us an illusion of understanding (otherwise we would go mad because of our inability to understand the complexities of the world) and give ourselves cover for our past actions.
Our thoughts are mostly post-hoc rationalizations that compel us into believing we know more than we actually do and give cover to our past actions.
Post hoc fabrication P: People judge mostly emotionally
P: To persuade change the environment, not the person
To persuade someone successfully you have two main choices. You can either talk to their elephant which is their intuitive, emotional, automatic, quick, system I type of thinking or you can change the path that the elephant (and the rider) is traveling on by tweaking the environment.
P: How to compel people to action (the Fogg Behavioral Model)
Not waking up system 2 is similar to the whispering into the elephant's ear P: People judge mostly emotionally