= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nick_Tarleton comments on The Social Coprocessor Model - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (570)
[shrug] I observed them at least treating wait staff, valets, hotel personnel, etc. with the same warm glow they did everyone else. Also, it's not like there weren't some obnoxious people at these conferences -- but even when they maintained their personal boundaries, I didn't see them get judgmental or even show any disapproval. They smiled just as warmly, and bid their farewells.
I didn't say they didn't filter people. They just didn't judge people.
In other words, they didn't confuse a conflict of goals with meaning that somebody else was bad, wrong, or unworthy for having those different goals, nor did they confuse accepting people with having to agree with them or give anything that was asked of them. They simply said "no" as warmly as they said "yes", and often with a sense of reluctance that made you feel as though they genuinely wished the no could have been a yes, but that alas, it was simply not to be.
How does one acknowledge and accept everybody without filtering people?
What I have seen of people who hold non-judgmentalism as a aspiration has led me to believe that it is a deeply anti-rational ideal. The net result is repeating the same mistakes over and over, such as associating with people who will will take advantage of the non-judger, or not correcting a critical failure because it's judgemental to consider it a failure. By critical failure I mean things like dropping out of the workforce out of sheer laziness; it would be judgemental to say that this is wrong so therefore it's wrong to stop anyone, including yourself, from doing so.
So they judged people and their needs or wants, then proceeded to claim they were non-judgemental. Either somebody isn't thinking through the meaning of "judgement", or doesn't care about the actual implications of that advice if it is really followed 100%.
Er, pjeby said that they did filter people.
Taboo judge. They decided whether to say "yes" or "no" to a request, and they (allegedly) didn't enter into some class of cognitive states associated with negative affect or disapproval.
Right - where the specific states involved are the ones that we use to signal lowered status or withdrawal of friendly interaction on the basis of a personal inadequacy or moral failing. In the vernacular, they didn't "look down their noses" on anybody, but instead treated them as if they were worthy of appreciation.
I just went back to listen to parts of the interview again to refresh my memory (it's been three years), and some of the key points Vanessa made were:
It feels good to experience being approved of, and paid attention to
It also feels good when you make other people feel good, by approving of and listening to them (which is a big part of why she and Garin do it)
Both only happen if you're sincere, rather than faking it
She says she tries to remember that she can learn something from everyone, as a way of evoking a state of genuine interest in herself
When you proactively project approval towards people before they even do or say anything, they start the conversation relaxed and feeling better -- and attribute this to you.
People often confuse arrogance and confidence -- they think they have to put on a big show in order to impress people, but really this is just another form of approval seeking.
She described the more useful attitude as "humble, but not apologetic", i.e., her openness to learn something from anyone, while at the same time not apologizing for her own choices, opinions, or personal boundaries.
These are just quick summaries from a ten-minute excerpt of the full interview, but I think this was the only section where we really talked about approval seeking or the process by which she and Garin "proactively approved of" people before meeting them.
I have a problem here. Filtering implies that some judgement has been made, and the person has been found wanting. It is harmful to advise against filtering, and therefore also harmful to advise against judging.
Advising people not to judge others is not the same as what you said. My point is only that this constitues bad advice.