= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
SilasBarta comments on The Sin of Persuasion - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (63)
I can think of a special case where this taboo doesn't hold (or has very different dynamics), which is worth studying for comparison: courtship. When courting someone (which in practice means a man to a woman), you're basically trying to persuade someone to make decisions she wouldn't otherwise make, and which will benefit you. Yet this kind of persuasion is in some sense expected.
In NYC, I asked a PUA what makes me, approaching a woman with romantic intent, any different from a panhandler? His answer was (paraphrasing) "because that's the role they expect out of men".
Different kind of persuasion.
PUA is more like salesmanship, or professional self-promotion. People don't object to that much if it's done skillfully. This post is more about the kind of persuasion that tells people they are incorrect, about things like religious beliefs. People tend to be more offended by that.
People don't object to skillful persuaders of the other kind, either. See, when you can limit yourself to the set of "happy customers", both kinds look the same. But that doesn't answer the question about the basis for why one kind is accepted and one kind isn't.