= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Pentashagon comments on New study on choice blindness in moral positions - 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 (151)
Dark Tactic:
This one makes me sick to my stomach.
Imagine some horrible person wants to start a cult. So they get a bunch of people together and survey them asking things like:
"I don't think that cults are a good thing." "I'm not completely sure that (horrible person) would be a good cult leader."
and switches them with:
"I think that cults are a good thing." "I'm completely sure that (horrible person) would be a good cult leader."
And the horrible person shows the whole room the results of the second set of questions, showing that there's a consensus that cults are a good thing and most people are completely sure that (horrible person) would be a good cult leader.
Then the horrible person asks individuals to support their conclusions about why cults are a good thing and why they would be a good leader.
Then the horrible person starts asking for donations and commitments, etc.
Who do we tell about these things? They have organizations for reporting security vulnerabilities for computer systems so the professionals get them... where do you report security vulnerabilities for the human mind?
I think that's known as voter fraud. A lot of people believe (and tell others to believe) that certain candidates were legally and fairly elected even when exit polls show dramatically different results. Although of course this could work the same way if exit polls were changed to reflect the opposite outcome of an actually fair election and people believed the false exit polls and demanded a recount or re-election. It just depends on which side can effectively collude to cheat.
No. What I'm saying here is that, using this technique, it might not be seen as fraud.
If the view on "choice blindness" is that people are actually changing their opinions, it would not be technically seen as false to claim that those are their opinions. Committing fraud would require you to lie. This may be a form of brainwashing, not a new way to lie.
That's why this is so creepy.