= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
That link isn't working.
Has there been a description of what specific advanced persuasion techniques Trump has been using?
Yes. Ad nauseum.
Again I only casually follow it, but from what I've read of his blog, he explains the phenomenon of Trump in terms of people's irrationality and Trump's ability to manipulate them. And then he gives example after example of how Trump does this.
Thank you. I'm not sure that Trump's techniques are all that advanced, but maybe the difference is that he's more thorough in applying them.
I've casually followed his predictions about Trump. It's so silly.
- Far Away From Election when Trump is the #1 news story every day — Trump will win because he is using advanced persuasion techniques!
- Post Khan Debacle once Trump is getting beaten badly in polls and looks unelectable—Hillary has now started using advanced persuasion techniques! That is why she has come back! (Hedging...)
- Polls Tighten — Trump is back to using advanced persuasion techniques!
Um. No. Sounds like phlogiston to me.
At any rate, Adams is the winner here. I'd never heard of the guy who wrote Dilbert. Now I've probably visited his blog 50 times in the last year and clicked around a bit. I'm sure he's sold plenty of books because of his predictions on the election.
Prediction: After the election, Adams will say this whole "Trump will win" gambit was just a meta advanced persuasion project he'd been running on all of his readers. This fact people believed Trump had special powers was proof that Adams is a Master Persuader. (Unless Trump actually wins...then Adams will say "See! I knew it all along!") Win. Win. For Adams.
Has there been a description of what specific advanced persuasion techniques Trump has been using? Or why they work powerfully on some people and not others?
Interesting interview. Does Adams ever write about his voice? It's distinctive (a little slower and more resonant than most people, I think) and it may be something he's worked on. Also, I'm wondering whether Putin is a better manipulator than Trump.
Relax when trying to remember something instead of making an effort.
It seems to me that the history of biological systematics/taxonomy is a great source of material for a study on dissolving the question (but I am neither a systematicist nor a historian). Are there any popular intros into the field that don't focus on individual botanists of the past? Serebryakov's "Morphology of plants", printed half a century ago, has a nice section on history, but it is limited in scope (and not quite "popular"). Other books often just list the people and what they did without interconnecting them, which is boring.
Naming Nature is focused on animals, but it or some of the books receommended with it might be the sort of thing you're looking for.
Thanks for the reviews-- I had no idea there were so many companies in that niche.
What do you mean by immediate impact on choices? Very few people make choices based on what the psychological theory of the day says they must do.
The most impactful branches are probably medicine and economics. They are medium-fucked, I think, because at the psych/anthro levels of dysfunction your patients just die or your economy implodes and people tend to dislike such things :-/
Now that I'm thinking about it, psychological papers probably have more effect in the LW-sphere than in the world generally. Are you counting nutrition as part of medicine?
I think this article suffers from aggregating all science into one big bin. In reality, different disciplines have a radically different level of problems with replicability and fraud. Classical hard sciences like physics and chemistry don't have much of a problem. Very soft sciences like psychology or anthropology have a huge problem.
You're right, though I'm not sure what the best way to phrase it better is.
My question still stands, since the parts of science which are most fucked seems to be the parts that have the most immediate impact on people's choices.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
I disagree. Sure, research shows that memory formation is improved when you relax. If I want to remember a specific fact though, it helps me to mentally search for contextual clues around where I learned the fact.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong though - any research or convincing anecdotes on this?
All I've got is personal experience. Sometimes relaxing is speeding up the process of "When I stopped thinking about it, it popped into my mind".
I search for contextual clues, and sometimes it works. However, if I'm stuck on some idea about what the right answer is, but that isn't working, relaxing can help.