I'm absolutely not familiar with the matter from scientific point of view. I've no idea how it is called, and I hope to be given some literature regarding the topic.. Or at perhaps its correct name, since I've no idea what keywords I could use for the googling..

Explanation of the phenomena I'm to ask about:
While we are studying a topic, and let other know the results of our study we are affecting others opinion about the topic. If the topic is dependent on their respective opinion, we're changing the topic(it could be generalized more). Kind of similar thing about "predictions of the future"(it's touched in the story about Oedipus).

In order to explain the phenomena I'm referring to, I'll give a couple of examples.

Example #1:
You have a buddy who is supposed to do something which matters to you. You're counting on it, and you really think that he'll do it.

Your observation of the matter, is that you do believe it shall be done. You may let him know your thoughts, and the effects his actions will have on you. It will have specific effect on him, and it is likely to decrease the chance of him not doing it(depending on your relationship of course).

In this way, your observation(and discussion, attempt to study a matter) has effects on the matter.

Example #2:
A girl has a "complex": she thinks she's fat(point me at a girl that doesn't have it, even if she's 172cm @ 45kg). She wants to lose weight.

She asks her guy, if he thinks she can lose the weight. He knows her well, he knows she isn't a person that can be following her decisions nor can she hold herself off from things she wants to eat. That is his observation, & his opinion is formed accordingly. If he tells it however, it is to have effect on her ability to do or not to do what she wants to do.

One can say the guy should lie to help her as his "observation" will have effect on her.

(*No, I haven't been in such a case. It's just a general thought with an example out of the head.*)

Example #3:
A person makes a new thread on a forum and wants to get an answer to his question. He knows, that the forum conversations are suffering from off-topic replies. He also knows, that the chain reaction of off-topic posts is of course started by the first off-topic comment. The person says, that he really wants to get the answer to his question, and that the first off-topic post is likely not to let him get it. That is the case, to a degree. This is an observation. However, that observation is likely to have an effect on those will read the OP and post in the thread, thus(probably) delaying the first off-topic post and increasing his chances to get his desired answer.

(Absolutely real one, from my life. )

I suppose I let you understand what kind of phenomena I'm referring to. I'd like to discuss it(but not the quality of my examples, at least not before I'm given "an answer"). I also believe it should be something studied by philosophers, and I think there should be some article to clarify the phenomena as well as offer various points of view about it, and etc' etc'

Thank you

You may want to clarify whether or not the observed is aware of the observation, for the purposes of your discussion. As one or the other will lead to completely different discussions.

Wikipedia: Observer effect (disambiguation page)

Psychology calls this the Observer-expectancy effect. This refers to both cases where people are observed and cases where inanimate objects are observed.

There's an other view to philosophical observer-observation discussions. It's about the existence of the Universe and everything. Does it really exist without someone observing it? Does it really exist without someone thinking of the existence? We know it was there 14 billion years before we came around. But the crucial words in the previous sentence are not "it was there", but "we know".

I love chipotles.

If a tree falls in the forest....

[edit]
Back a few hours later, and since nothing seems to have occured on allegro.cc from my observation, I shall digress a bit.

The OP seems to be hinting more at the power of suggestion, with regards to weight loss and such, and the inherent affect it has on "reality". ie. If you grow up with a parent that says you're stupid, you're worthless, you'll never amount to anything, etc... this can have one of two effects:

1) You accept it, and believe it, and thus it becomes true in your experience.

2) You reject it, and seek to prove it wrong, and thus is becomes false in your experience (unless it actually is true, but I'm rather doubtful)

Our "Self Image" is often belief-based. Beliefs are limiting constructs in our mind that cause acceptance or rejection of various ideas based on something we hold to be true (but many people hold false ideas to be true, obviously, or everyone would always be rather than believe).

Positive reinforcement and support is a much better model for behaviour training. You can do it. You're smart and can think for yourself. You're very accepting of other people. You have a good memory. You're losing weight with every breath you breathe! If you accept beliefs like those, they are likely to play a more positive role in your experience. Unless you're a toothpick like me, then you may want to modify the belief that every breath you take makes you think of eating high calorie foods

However, that isn't to say that positive reinforcement can't have negative results as well, when used incorrectly. Rewarding people for negative actions, or rewarding when there is no merit in doing so, can cause results that are undesirable.

The OP contains some bad examples in my humble opinion, or at least has a bad title. I mean: stating the way you perceive things is something completely different than observing. Stating furthermore requires an extra step of interpretation; the pinpointing of the nature of which would lead to the question what consciousness, reality or language is.
Physics has some examples of cases where it's impossible to unilaterally 'extract' information without touching and influencing something. (I think.) For people however, in theory you could build a satellite with a camera and observe people with it, without them ever knowing.^[1]
Thinking there is something like immediately and without consequences 'copying' or 'reflecting' the reality as you perceive it by the means of stating something, is an erroneous assumption I think I detect in the OP.

Undoubtedly reality as we know it exists, because we see it. The universe as we know it has many mysteries. What you describe is called the anthropic principle. I believe it is a somewhat scientifically respected answer for questions like "why is there intelligent life on earth". Like the wikipedia article explains, it is not a valid theory however.

Thank you, I'm more than satisfied by the replies! Also I've been perfectly understood which is rare & pleasant

@Mark
That's two different stories to a degree, but not necessarily completely different:

Imagine that above girl not hearing her BF doesn't believe she'll do it, but he could still be behaving this way: ignoring her diet for example, and eating food she loves but should not eat right in front of her(that could be said to be encouraged by his belief in her Godly strength of will, but come on).

However my examples hint that participants are aware about "observation" by the observer.

@Ben

YES! Thanks a lot. It's not very extended, but this is exactly it. And now at least I know the phenomenas name

It is called "Participant-observer effect" or "Observer-expectancy effect".

@weapon_s

Please read my reference to Ben. And yes, I do agree I should've given a little different title.

@Johan

Yeah that's the philosophical part of the point, although not really given in the examples. weapon_s has expanded it further and linked us to a wiki

@jhuuskon

Yeah well. I did expect SOMEONE will have to say that sooner or later

@Derezo(*and this is relevant for everyone*)
So letting others know our believe in their inevitable success regarding their plans will either support them in following it, or the opposite.

The same span of outcomes is expected from inevitable failure. So how can we pick the right "choice" to "help" them following their decisions, and achieving what they want?(*)

I have some thoughts regarding the topic, but for I suppose very obvious(now obvious ) reasons, I'll pronounce them later.

*- Go get M.D. in psychiatry, oh well.. Anything simpler

[edited; made bit clearer]

Well, I knew I would need to reference this material again. It seems apparent that I stored it in the back of my mind specifically for this very moment when I shall share it with you.

"Part 1: The Purpose of Nonviolent Communication & Expressing Observations and Feelings"

I haven't watched the entire series, or put much thought into it, but your question immediately triggered my recollection of "Giraffe Ears".

I'm now starting to see how you try to link the expectancy effect, to human actions. I'll give it some thought (whoop-dee-doo :p ) Perhaps related to this subject is the selective attention effect.
I'm starting to see a pattern: selective attention -> expectancy effect -> 'altered behaviour'.

Nobody is going to reply, so spill it... please. I'm curious (in how many ways my view is superior to yours )

@Derezo

Eh.. This guy describes an utopia, which isn't for our world. We need the game "who's right" as well as "giving". It's matter of our personality which is dominating, and how balanced the things are, but nevertheless if you just "give" there will be people who'll be willing to just "take".

Is it in further videos, do you suggest me to watch it to find "answer to my question"?

@weapon_s

Interesting thought, it could very well be related to the selective attention effect, I "see a connection", but I'm not sure I can formulate it. Awesome video however, very interesting.

Would you expand the idea?

Aaand the spilling time for the sake of your self affirmation:

I somehow can't gather up all thoughts in to one place, but overall here is my point: In order to do something we must be willing to be doing so, hence in order to inspire one to try and do what he wants to do, we should try to explain that he is able to do it if he tries, and emphasize his will to do it.

***

Well. Something like that.. I'm dying to know your superior point of view.

[Expanding on idea][My ideas seem to be vague too][ XD starting wall of text ] [Noticing it doesn't have much to do with expectancy effect and selective attention ]
(It's unworkable, so I consider it bogus. Posted for entertainment purposes only )

What I'm trying to say is: the reason encouraging someone works, might be that you are introducing a new separate 'goal' (somehow related to selective attention?), or that you are given space to create your own goals, like "not being a maggot" or "showing off" (expectancy effect?).
While you seem to assume you can convey a thought, I have an unworkable view of this whole matter, which boils down to: the human mind is a collection of associations, intertwined and showing hysteresis (from A to B is different than from B to A, dependent on time and input).
I personally believe the will to do something is a maximum of the amount of 'concepts' or 'associations' you can manipulate. And I think language is a great way to introduce new concepts.

Sounds that good, eh?
But I disagree. He is describing a communication model used to understand needs, and to communicate needs, in a way that is more effective. It does require a significant degree of non-attachment to attain the levels that he talks about in some of the scenarios.

The trouble with the "who's right" game is that those who play it refuse to admit that they are wrong, because then they are admitting some sort of defeat. I'm not sure of the benefits to playing the "who's right" game.

Common sense still applies, but remember that it is a video about communication, not about property ownership. Giving in this way does not cost you in tangible objects, but in effort. As some of the audience members point out, other people may not be interested in adopting this form of communication.

I'm not suggesting everyone on the planet (or even a large percentage of us) can just jump into that mode of thinking.

Dare I say you're a mad man with "quotations"? I'm not sure I know exactly what you want to know, but here are some tips.

Communication is non-revokable (ie. you can never really take anything back)
Communication affects the outcome of what you're communicating.
The "right" form of communication is not always black and white "this is wrong" and "this is right", because people are different.
The best results for making requests, or encouraging someone to do something, are achieved through positive and non-violent communication.

In your first example in the OP, when you're asking someone to do something, the best thing is to usually believe that they can or will do it and communicate that belief to them. If you can't shake a belief that they cannot do what you're asking, or that they will not do what you're asking, maybe it's best not to ask them in the first place

In your second example of the fatty chicka, her boyfriend should be encouraging and supportive of her decision to lose weight. If he really thinks she can't stick to her plan, that's probably where she needs the most support. It gets a little subjective on the details, though, and it might require suggestions on more specific situations, like what her actual eating disorder is. Does she eat fast food too much? Why? Could she switch fast food places? Is she using food as a general outlet for emotional problems caused by something that is out of kilter elsewhere in her life? Maybe she needs a new outlet, and supporting her with something totally different would bleed over into solving her food disorder issue.
Communication is subjective.

Damn it's somehow difficult to write about things you don't understand. Took me quite a while to sit down to write that reply O.O

@Weapon

>Posted for entertainment purposes only

It was a success when I read it first time, A+

I suppose I understand now what you mean about the selective attention. Yes, it's there. I could now recall attempts to choose correct words while touching sensitive topics in conversations with others, so that to avoid direct associations with the very sensitive topics. I'm not sure I thought about it deeply though, however.. Although it is a interesting topic, due to me being concerned about general motivation, and not momentary manipulation it's not relevant. The selective attention is something momentary, you're rather not likely(or at least I don't think it's a right thing to do), to keep ones attention off from something permanently(without'em thinking about the thing at all, practically keeping them in an illusion): you can't try to hide the fact she's fat, if she really is. At least I won't bother trying to

Though maybe I'm literally wrong.

>What I'm trying to say is: ...

I love it how you put all together.
As of new separate goals, well.. Idea of the selective attention is to miss something which is visible, I can't see how selective attention is relevant here.. Perhaps only if a large set of goals within the same action could hide the fact it requires effort. "Showing off" as the expectancy effect.. Could be.

I agree with you that human mind can be regarded as a directed graph.

>I personally believe the will to do something is a maximum of the amount of 'concepts' or 'associations' you can manipulate. And I think language is a great way to introduce new concepts.

@Derezo

>Sounds that good, eh? ...

I don't think it's productive, nor do I think it's even good to project it towards those will regard it as a weakness. It sure is a right scenario for every small society, practically it's so more or less in between me and I want to think all those around me. But there are cases when it should be shut. I'm also not sure attachment is always a bad thing, although it does create dependency.

>The trouble with the "who's right" game is that those who play it refuse to..

It maybe sometimes bit hard to admit, but once again.. Common sense. Practically you could replace each of the models with it. You shouldn't just be busy giving, but sometimes explaining something and defending your course of actions maybe practical. As well as admitting it was wrong(if it was), and letting others see their actions are wrong. And if they don't wanna admit that cos' it's a defeat, maybe they need some help in actually getting defeated?

>Dare I say you're a mad man with "quotations"?

Thought about it myself. As long as I can still be understood it saves a LOT of time from both sides, reading and writing.

>The best results for making requests, or encouraging someone to do something, are achieved through positive and non-violent communication.

Of course...

>In your first example in the OP, when you're asking someone to do something, the best thing is to usually believe that they can or will do it and communicate that belief to them. If you can't shake a belief that they cannot do what you're asking, or that they will not do what you're asking, maybe it's best not to ask them in the first place

Nice, agreed...

>.. fatty chicka ..

So here she needs most support- agreed, yet on the other hand- perhaps she really can't, and should not invest effort in to what is futile.

>Communication is subjective.

This
Life is.

[edited a bit, for clearer thoughts(yes it was even more clouded before)]

I agree, with exception to this:

Something that I think, which goes against common thought, is that there is no such thing as can't when it comes to these types of situations. There is only won't.

"Perhaps she really won't."

That very well may become true, but it is still future tense rather than present tense. Can't implies that she lacks the ability to do it in the present, rather than the motivation to do it in the future. The tools are there to lose weight. It can be done. If it doesn't happen, the present still doesn't change and she is continually in a state of won't lose weight. Nobody is ever in a situation where they can't lose weight.. and this has nothing to do with weight, it applies across the whole board of personal development and addiction.

That is a huge problem with people these days, and it frustrates me to no end. "I can't" and "I need" are used superfluously throughout the culture here. I can't stop. I can't eat that. I need my coffee. I need my smokes. I can't quit.

No. You WONT stop. You WONT eat that. You WANT your coffee. You WANT your smokes. You WONT quit.

Drives me up the wall.

I consider general motivation nothing else than a chain of 'momentary manipulation'.

What I mean is: I think the human mind is inclined to follow thoughts (and/or actions), whichever lead to the most observations. And observations are dependent on our state of mind, the latter which can in very intricate (abstract) ways be changed by language.

Disagreed. I think that whole video describes a way to communicate nothing. While IMHO this might leave the creation of motivation in the hands of the listener, it might prove ineffective to someone who is already strongly motivated by other things (drugs, money, social-pressure). Sometimes you have to scream and kick to reach someone, perhaps destroying everything they hold dear.^[1]In all other cases 'positive and non-violent communication' is better, I think.

I kind of disagree. There's also a "no matter what I say" won't, and a "even if our financial situation changes" won't. You can't expect everybody to be motivated by the same prospects, how wonderful and positive they may be. Isn't that jackal thinking? "DO this! You WILL be better off!"

Yeah, agreed. Lame excuses to not change anything.

It made me laugh out loud.

[edit]Is it only the pleasant long-term kind of motivation you are interested in?

@Derezo

You're right, it's matter of peoples decisions. These things, people CAN. And weapons_s's(*) words about people who need a kick sometimes, could very much be right as well. However, it doesn't my point of view it only showed that I gave wrong example thus passing on a wrong idea.

My idea, is that not always peoples lack of will to do something, even though they "sort of want to" is something "bad" which should be suppressed and goal should be followed. Example:

A guy finishes high school. He's an awesome Starcraft2 player, he's in NA Grandmaster league. He is considering career of a pro gamer, but he isn't confident he can really beat those elite players, he has his family against it he did want to study in a college just half a year ago. It's not clear to me he should go for it, perhaps another path can give him a "better life". I doubt I would be even trying to encourage him be he my friend.

However, what I would do is probably try to dig inside of his mind to try and see how badly does he want it, and what encourages him to want it.. Then I'd try to pull up these things for him to see them, and then I'd encourage him to try to decide what he wants(perhaps to try to gather more information before making his decision).

>... Drives me up the wall.

Does the above feeling of futility ever come to you? :p

@Weaponess

>I consider general motivation nothing else than a chain of 'momentary manipulation'.

No, I do not agree with you. At least I do not completely agree:

Damn you're right. I wanted to say that there are various "general" goals which inspire us, but actually.. They only work if they do inspire us all the time, which "add" these manipulative effects to our mind long enough for us to get there. If they lose their strength, and don't give us that manipulative push for too long, we may abandon our goal.

*- is that weapons_s's written correct? Should it be weapon_s, or weapon_ss? Or just weaponess perhaps? :p

I would translate that to: Every thought/emotion/observation can lead^[1] into (any) action. But even the explicit will to do something can also lead/be linked to irrelevant/existing activity/thoughts.

If you consider only the explicit conscious determination to do something, I think you will find it has little influence on our actions.

Don't agree with me >.< We're not done discussing until we have a workable model of all human motivation.

P.S. It's "Weapon S", "Weapon_S", or "S". (Or just call me by my real name, if you know it )

Well, a huge part of it separating yourself from a conflict. So that is somewhat correct. Let things be as they are.

I can't handle getting worked up like that myself. There are people in my life that I simply cannot communicate with effectively, because they require a reactive, aggressive, attacking type of communication to get anything across. It's so taxing that I just don't bother talking to them.

I'm sure I could expect that, but I don't.

Well, yes and no. I try not to tell people to do things at all any more, because my peers always want to do things that I do not want to do. I tell people what I do not do, and I often give reasons that they agree with, but trying to get them to do something else is like pulling teeth. There is definitely a difference in motivation.

Food is a good example. I've recently adopted an obsession with a sushi place in town. I love it. $7 during lunch hours, $10 during dinner hours, all you can eat chinese buffet + sushi bar. Few of my peers will even try sushi, but it's what makes it such a great deal. I often just go alone.

The typical response to the presentation of the idea is disgust. They don't know what sushi is, they often have never tried it, but because it is different than what they are familiar with it is deemed "gross". The thing is, I enjoy it for a many reasons: taste, price, nutritional value, and I think it's pretty much one of the best forms of food I can think of. I'm motivated to do it because I feel it is a healthier choice to eat out.

So what is the common alternative suggestion? McDonalds.
That's gross. Motivation? Sugar and bright colours. Its a Happy Meal.

Often this can indeed be futile, in your SC2 situation most definitely. The trouble is often brain chemistry. People think "chemical imbalance" and they think of depression and anti-depressants... but what if there was a different sort of achievement-based chemical imbalance caused by, say, Video Games, that creates a false sense of accomplishment when nothing is actually being done? Hmm..

I think that convincing other people to do something against their own will is extremely difficult, often futile. I haven't had much success with it.

@Weaponess <= I declare this to be your real name from now on

>I would translate that to: Every thought/emotion/observation can lead[1] into (any) action. But even the explicit will to do something can also lead/be linked to irrelevant/existing activity/thoughts.

Huh?

>If you consider only the explicit conscious determination to do something, I think you will find it has little influence on our actions.

Not sure if I agree here.. The point is that in majority of the cases where decision making is required we make our decision when we think we're enough satisfied with our awareness regarding the topic. However, our emotions do affect the kind of arguments we will be finding regarding the topic.

Example:

Prejudices can easily affect the arguments we do find for and against. And one can never have all relevant data, as majority of the problems we solve on daily basis are "NP-complete".

& all above "in short":
There are many cases, when due to our emotions and/or prejudices we may miss a lot of important arguments against our point of view, and even accept invalid arguments for our point of view.

>Don't agree with me >.< We're not done discussing until we have a workable model of all human motivation.

Damn I've had something quite bold floating in mind. I can't recall. But overall, currently I'm looking at this topic as at the renaming question of this thread.

@Derezo
>I can't handle getting worked up like that myself. There are people in my life that I simply cannot communicate with effectively, because they require a reactive, aggressive, attacking type of communication to get anything across. It's so taxing that I just don't bother talking to them.

Well, not everyone "deserves" it, at least not with "our" current resources. Those you do want to bother to inspire, e.g. your friends, family.. Well, then there's no choice you do what it takes to get it done. Up to specific limits of course, but these kicks kick in being relevant suddenly.

>I think that convincing other people to do something against their own will is extremely difficult, often futile. I haven't had much success with it.

Noo! It's literally not my point: in my example the SC2 player hesitates. Though it was anyways an example to show that sometimes that "lack of will", and "I can't" isn't useless. The "topic" is how to make people follow their goals, even though it isn't always that easy for them to be following their goals.

Append:
I'm not sure I see any specific errors in grammar, but I somehow doubt the language is correct and easy to understand.. I'll clarify everything on request of course.

The SC2 example is a very atypical career choice, like NFL Quarterback. He would be best to get advice regarding it from other professional players, I imagine... but I really don't know how the professional gaming industry works.

You can only support them in accomplishing their goals, you can't really make them do it. They have to want to

Perhaps we need to establish what a goal is. Like most people, I'm terrible with goals. I've been trying to correct that for some time now. I've read that two important parts of setting a goal are:

1) Use a metric by which you are measuring your goal. ie. "Save $10,000" or "Lose 15lbs"

2) Have a time line that your goal will be completed. ie. "Save $10,000 by December 2011" or "Lose 15lbs by August 2011"

Those two things are important because you can use them together to measure progress. If you haven't lost any weight by June, or saved any money, then you're not doing very well and need to change your methods.

In your SC2 example, is this pro gamer career really a goal?

I like goals that are easier to work with, like make X sales, or make X dollars, or work X hours, etc. Going back to the OP example #3 of the forum thread, a goal in that situation could be to receive 20 on-topic replies within 48 hours. Then you just need to set out a plan on doing that

[edit]
I must say that this is a confusing thread. In any case, I'm still trying to tie this into the "observer-observation connection". Are you thinking of the "pseudo science" inspired slit experiment style of the observer's expectation affecting the outcome? I have a feeling that's the case, but you should not and cannot apply it to anything but your own endeavours. The idea there is very complex, and is better based in the psychology field than physics. There's nothing magical or "secret" about it.
You can create a vision of the expected outcome you wish to achieve, then break down a logical goal oriented process of achieving that result. Visualize your goals and expectations and keep them on your mind as you work towards it. I find that when I have a very good vision of what it is that I want, the answers just come and things start popping up surrounding my goals. The reason this happens is simple, though: Your focus has changed and with it your attraction to the stimuli that support your goals. It's not that those things wouldn't have been there without you thinking of your goals, it's that you wouldn't have been open to the awareness of their existence without having thought of your goals.

... so it doesn't work if you're a lazy sack of crap eating cheetos all day in front of the tee-vee

How long does it take you to see the oddity in this picture?

{"name":"3vkP3.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/5\/958e78579e7ef64034aaeb642b6b6c9c.jpg","w":400,"h":664,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/5\/958e78579e7ef64034aaeb642b6b6c9c"}

More than 10 seconds.

@Derezo
I'm waiting for weapon_s post.. I'll do for few more days.

What post Too busy ATM... still interested in subject... must use broken sentences... to stress how busy...
'Oddity' freakin' obvious if you scroll in from the top . Or am I missing something...

Even if you don't, the fact that you know there is an oddity excludes the boobs immediately. Found it in 2 seconds.

I actually spent 10^[1] seconds or so looking at her boobs, to check whether the 'oddity' wasn't cleverly hidden on her boobs, with a Godzilla as a distraction. Good example of the expectancy effect :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria
I learned that in super dweeb class. One of my concerns is that maybe a normally motivated person, doesn't need to think about motivation; and that the only reason we^[2] are interested in motivating others, is because we want to be motivated ourselves.

I'm very skeptical about the influence of 'rational thought'.

For example: somebody who runs the red light, might be driven by: a fear for her/his work, or hate of the friend (s)he had just an argument with, or puppies (probably, not consciously). Conversely somebody who is involved with saving the environment, might be someone who: is an eco-terrorist, or someone who works as a volunteer for WWF, or someone who sits all day in front of the TV (although you wouldn't say this person is very much 'involved with the environment'). Make sense?

Have to post. Will have to edit.

It works for StackOverflow...

I feel really ashamed for the delay. Nevertheless:

@Derezo

>The SC2 example is a very atypical career choice, like NFL Quarterback. He would be best to get advice regarding it from other professional players, I imagine... but I really don't know how the professional gaming industry works.

My point was that the hesitations, and the "I can't" aren't always pure lack of will, sometimes you really perhaps can't. And if the gamble is worth it.. That's where one has to decide. It's not really something you can encourage a person, you can only encourage him to gather up & process info regarding his decision, but not inspire him to go for it or not(unless you think you know the topic well..).

>You can only support them in accomplishing their goals, you can't really make them do it. They have to want to

That's a very complex statement.. Sometimes they DO want the result, but can't gather up to do what it takes, or are scared to fail, or it's too much effort for them, etc', etc'.. Sometimes if they get the kick, do it- they're grateful afterwards. I've had it, I do remember specific case when I gave the kick, and I think I was grateful few times to get it as well.. Although not sure(could've been long time ago, now ego is grown up too large).

about goals

Not sure if "PRO SC2 career" is a goal, although getting a sponsor & a popular stream- perhaps is. As well as advancing in tournaments, and winning money.. But specific goals are perhaps a good kick towards progress, you can't always know what's the right goal.. Kind of issue. Especially bad with speculative trading. Worked terrible for me, as failing to comply with them due to errors dragged more errors and unbalanced my mental state.

About #3 example in the OP thread.. Let's say that's the goal, and.. If I fail to achieve it, I'm frustrated. And nothing I can do about it. And if I do achieve it.. Erm, how does it help me? If I had it or not had it.. It doesn't matter.

>Visualize your goals and expectations and keep them on your mind as you work towards it. I find that when I have a very good vision of what it is that I want, the answers just come and things start popping up surrounding my goals.

Well, yes. Though issue is that A) you need to know what you do want B) you need to think of how to get it and C) you gotta do what it takes.
Sometimes all three are god damn hard. Usually I think first one is the most difficult

@Vanneto

You're either a Gay, or a very satisfied man :-\

@Weaponess

>Visualize your goals and expectations and keep them on your mind as you work towards it. I find that when I have a very good vision of what it is that I want, the answers just come and things start popping up surrounding my goals.

To a degree, but not always.. Sometimes we just care about the other person. Feel responsibility.

>I'm very skeptical about the influence of 'rational thought'.

We do what we want to do, we think about what we want to think. But there are things we can't miss, which can prevent us from doing what is not rational. I can imagine someone rushing to his job while being late, and crossing a road without looking. But I can't really see them running in front of a bus that won't stop. I think that is because some rationality remains, even if we rush to work.

>For example: somebody who runs the

About counter-example does introduce place for rational thought..
I've that suspect we're lacking definitions & terms again.

And that was my thinking on the situation of NFL quarterback and professional gamer. I mean, I can't become an NFL player. I simply can't, and I know that I can't. It's obvious that I can't, but it's not a question that has ever appeared outside of this discussion and it has a simple answer. Professional Gaming is such a tiny industry, especially being as specific as SC2, that it should be obvious whether you can do it or not and thus not be a question.

The "I can't" discussion was more appropriate for the losing weight scenario, or generally something with a metric, rather than obtaining intangible things like talents or abilities. A limbless man can't become a boxer, no matter how much he tries. I would hope that he wouldn't dream about it, either.

I'm not saying that "I won't" are always irrational. You shouldn't throw morality out the window. However, I would say that most situations you can and should encourage people with require an elimination of I won'ts. In other words, people you need to encourage are inherently lazy I know from experience!

I think we're pretty well on the same page.

I think it refers to:

By "we" I don't mean: humankind when communicating; I mean: us here discussing it.

What about the I must's? Favourable or not? What about somebody who is hunting the little green men who certainly steal his/her vitamins? Can't the limbless man dream about being a boxer? Couldn't that be a motivation for him to succeed in other things?

I think the keyword is 'rationality'. I believe somebody can be motivated without reason (rationality), or reasons (goals). Of course, all actions can be interpreted as having some reason or following some rules. I believe that reason and reasons aren't the origin of 'motivation' however; by a process of mutual influence, reason and motivation can be drawn closer to each other. (I think this is an important principle of science.)

If somebody molests a child, a common reaction/story would be to say:"that person didn't have any (good) reason to do that". Surely the molester must have had some motivation however; whether you interpret that as a reason is something else. Would you encourage someone to go hunt the aforementioned green men? You might say it is a delusion; and irrational. In the internal rational process of that person, it might make very much sense to think there are green men, and that those green men steal their vitamins, and therefor must be hunted down. It is in what I would call the social rational consensus that it becomes irrational.
'Reason' and 'rationality' are becoming synonymous with 'good'. Have you never felt like shit after doing 'the rational thing'? Acting in accordance to the social rational consensus might get you positive social feedback however. This feedback is most effective if the subject can relate this feedback to present thoughts/emotions, and not to other 'existing things'^[1].
I don't think you can decide for another person what is good for them, or will make them happy. You can try to notice the things someone tries and/or accomplishes, or make 'the world'^[2] a bit of a less mean and unsurmountable thing for that person.
And maybe try to be considerate of what your remarks will mean to that person, and what things that person holds for certain at that moment.^[3][4]

Hmm, "I must" is something that I've never paid much attention to. I've never really thought much about that until now, and I have come to the conclusion that "I must" is a keeper. It shall replace "I gotta". I gotta is such a bad meme, it's almost as bad as "I can't believe it!" and "geez".

Sure and perhaps. Maybe my comment on dreaming about it needed an emoticon

Rationality branches this into a new direction. I do think that reason and motivation are closely related, but I think that desire is even closer, easier to work with, and is less subjective. The reason I say it is less subjective is because everyone really wants the same thing, but everyone has different reasons. What we all ultimately want is feelings. A lot of our actions are extrapolated from a desire for feelings.

{"name":"370_Feelings-Wheel-Color.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/2\/e2cbb6f5981d13c4feb5a83998e7cc96.jpg","w":370,"h":370,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/2\/e2cbb6f5981d13c4feb5a83998e7cc96"}

We want to experience lots of the good ones and none of the bad ones. I propose that the ultimate problem with motivation occurs when we continually fail to do the right things to produce the feeling that we want. A continued failure to sustain success snowballs, and we fall into a trap as we begin experiencing more of the bad ones, further sinking us into a gloomy pit of despair. I think that this is especially true of "thinking" type of people because they are more likely to become disconnected with their feelings.

I think you've misunderstood me, but I'm happy with your interpretation
Most of your post I agree with. But maybe you could explain how subjectivity describes the relationship between reason and desire, and perhaps that big 'ol hippy circle What is in the center and what is on the outside? Can you go around it? What does that signify? Etc.

I had started to write about "I must" and my mind just went on a tangent with it. The I must pattern doesn't cross through my mind very often, and instead I have an "I gotta" that comes through. Pesky bugger.

Rationality is subjective because people value different things in different ways. Think of the feeling you would get from finding $100. How would an 8 year old girl feel about it? A homeless man who's been eating nothing but stale donuts for the last 3 days? A single mom? Would Willy Gates even bend over and pick it up?

They all feel different feelings, but it's not because they don't have access to the same feelings, but because they all rationalize it differently. Some people would search for the owner and get feelings from that. Some people would tweet about it and get different feelings again.

As for the hippy circle, I came across an "emotion wheel" a while back in one of my Wikipedia journey's and thought of it as I was writing that. I just grabbed one that stuck out in a google image search.
Basically the idea is that there are the "core emotions" in the centre, and as you move out from the circle they become more complex forms. Should be fairly trivial to separate the bad ones from the good ones

@Derezo

What is this circle? Would you link me to some wiki article?

Append:
I've to say much more.

There's a wiki link to Plutchik's Wheel of Emotions in my last post, but it should really be self explanatory. The wheel is in no way complete, though.

There are many variations

@Derezo, Weaponess

The topic is getting damn hard to follow. And for some reason, although I know I want to follow it, I'm.. Getting insanely delayed with it, for no reason. I think asking for forgiveness is actually relevant here.

>I think the keyword is 'rationality'. I believe somebody can be motivated without reason (rationality), or reasons (goals). Of course, all actions can be interpreted as having some reason or following some rules. I believe that reason and reasons aren't the origin of 'motivation' however; by a process of mutual influence, reason and motivation can be drawn closer to each other.

Agreed, there isn't necessarily a strict border between reason and motivation. There maybe reason to achieve something that motivates us, there maybe just blind lust to do it, that "it" can be momentary imminent thing, or a distant goal towards which we go following our reason which assures us we want it...

To a degree, above paragraph offers a reformulation to the renaming "big question" of the thread:

Assuming there is a distant goal we want, how to motivate ourselves(or others) to be following it? How to transform distant, general goal which can't be achieved here and now in to imminent motivation, to make one more small step towards it?

>'Reason' and 'rationality' are becoming synonymous with 'good'.

Yes they are. And the less they're affected with imminent short term wish, the "better" the reasoning is.

>There's a wiki link to Plutchik's Wheel of Emotions in my last post, but it should really be self explanatory. The wheel is in no way complete, though.

Thanks, found some readable stuff.. Curious, but doesn't look too scientific(what I found).

Break it down into smaller, bite sized pieces.

How do you eat an Elephant?
Simple. One bite at a time.

This will facilitate motivation, but it still wont create it. Motivation must come from within. You must want to do the activity.

Science is more of a thinking discipline, which is less about feeling
The study of feelings is ultimately a branch of psychology in science, though. However, it's much more difficult to perform experiments on such things and fully apply the scientific method.

Just had the thought: 'being motivated' might be the opposite of 'letting go', 'being done with it', 'leaving it behind you'. Something that motivates you can be described as 'haunting' you like a irrational obsession.

The opening posts with several cases of working and not working, is a good start IMHO. Ideally we should make some case studies actually... (If we could find the motivation )

As for the emotional disk, utter crap in my opinion. Several versions? What does that tell? It doesn't open up any new thoughts in my case.

Then don't focus on the graphic. What I said isn't written on the wheel, I just didn't want to write out a bunch of feelings and their opposites.

What I said was that feelings are the ultimate motivators. Actions are motivated by, and ultimately become, feelings. Motivation is not driven by thoughts that are observed. You feel motivation. You don't think motivation.

"I think very motivated today!"

When you feel bored, you seek excitement.
When you feel lonely, you seek acceptance.
When hungry you eat and feel satisfied.

My proposal was that people have trouble with motivation when their thoughts, which ultimately become actions, don't line up with feelings. They suddenly don't know what they want, because there is a disconnection there. They stop thinking in ways that grant them the feelings they want and begin thinking in other ways that are less fulfilling. They lose sight of their motivation.

It tells that there are varying applications for it. The wheel is just a graphic that depicts select feelings (common ones in this case) in an organized way that shows there are both enjoyable feelings and detrimental feelings.

If your body was a business, thought would be like micro-management and emotions would be like macro-management. If you primarily live your life with emotions, then you are prone to error on the details. If you over-think things all the time you tend to lose scope of priorities.

An excellent analogy.

... clearly I have done some over-thinking!

A good sense of judgement is the arbitrator.

Let's not get in a discussion about emotions.

Or thoughts... which should make you wonder what's the difference. Let's not get in a discussion about emotions.
I'm not happy with the statement "your motivation is influenced by your emotions; and emotions are a mystery" as a conclusion.
Today I sketched an insane circle^[1] diagram of emotions.^[2] Giving some thoughts about motivation.
Circle doesn't really translate to flat text (but I'll try). !@$# I tried.

I'm not happy with that statement either!
Emotions are no mystery. You're thinking of women

Maybe I've been a little too Zen-like
The difference between a thought and a feeling is pretty clear. Feelings are felt in your body, thoughts are not. Thoughts just pass by and require motivation to do anything about them.

That's why I used the word emotion much less than the word feeling. Hunger is not an emotion, but it is a feeling, and it is certainly a motivator.

Emotions are feelings, and are felt in your body, but feelings are not necessarily emotions.

@Everyone
Since the order is mixed dramatically..

Very nice.. It's kind of obvious, but I somehow didn't think about it. Yes, indeed: when you have a lot of small easily achievable goals(leading you to some big achievement)you can get constant "remotivation" by accomplishing small goals and thus seeing your progress towards the big achievement.

As of it "not creating" motivation- well, it "boosts" it. Of course you have to really "want" that final achievement, but that's the point we've started from: one wants something, but is unable to follow the way to get it.

Uh? Clarify

Thoughts are also actions.. Since thoughts in many cases summon feelings(doesn't really work in case of hunger, but sure does in case of say.. Anxiety, or envy..)- they do create feelings as well.

I disagree, both can be both. And all our actions are induced by both.
.....
......
....... (yes I decided not to delete the above said)

I like the analogy, I mostly agree with it after some thinking. However, no emotion is possible without the processing by thoughts, hence thoughts very much affect our emotions. And emotions of course affect our thoughts. But still, I'm not sure why can't emotions make us do little things e.g.buy that ice-cream, flirt with that chick(emotions may make us do this stuff). & so our macro decisions, after being affected by a chain of emotionally influenced processing with thoughts are taken to some kind of its final "stage", which is enough for us to decide to make that decision(in other macro decisions are only taken after emotionally affected thinking).
I'm not sure if I can say that emotions have made us make this or that decision..

>Let's not get in a discussion about emotions.

I'm not sure it's possible to avoid in a conversation about motivation.. :-|

>Emotions are no mystery. You're thinking of women

So true about me, during latest months

***

So.. I'm a bit surprised, but the surprise is rather good.
We did advance at least somewhere:

I order to keep ourselves motivated in achievement of a goal we have to split the goal to smaller goals, accomplishment of which will keep us motivated(works "towards others" the same way I guess..).

There have to be other things as well though..

I'm not sure I agree, but after writing a paragraph about it I realized it began to venture off into the mind-body problem.

Extremely passive, internal actions.
I was referring to actions in the sense of creating change in the external world. You can sit around and think about something until the cows come home, but the only thing that will be different is your thoughts. That is, until you actually do something about it .

This also implies a greater somewhat unattainable goal is necessary. I think people usually refer to those as "dreams"

Did you ever have a thought you knew was not real? (Maybe under influence, tired, having a fever induced delirium.) Did you ever catch yourself doing something you knew wasn't fruitful, or weird to begin with? (Obsessive maybe even.) Did you ever have a very strong emotion, but you had to act reasonable for a moment? I was talking about the way you move your thoughts away from that. That way might be the same thing that makes you give up on other things. From one point of view all your actions are just obsessions based on deliriums.^[1]

I guess I'm a monoist. This is the kind of discussion I was hoping to avoid.^[2] What are emotions? What are thoughts? What kind of emotions and thoughts are there?
But I agree thoughts don't shape our emotions, rather they shape the way communicate and distinguish our emotions... Yeah, let's get some ontological and structuralist discussion in here as well It is possible to 'not know what you want'. But I rather would translate that to: 'unable to express your desire, and unfamiliar with methods to satisfy those desires'. (I mean: what is 'knowledge' )

Because I have too much spare time on my hands, I present to you my Emotional Disk of Skewed Perspective.^[3]
{"name":"604215","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/1\/318d93ef75ecdba54220eb0ead03b62e.png","w":400,"h":400,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/1\/318d93ef75ecdba54220eb0ead03b62e"}

Legend:^[4]

Explanation:

Being based on my Explanation of All Communication Comprehension of Skewed Perspective, I'm hoping to improve both. But, if this can give this discussion a boost, I'm happy.

I don't think unattainable is correct. That's too subjective. Breaking a large goal down, such as 'become a journalist', isn't because the goal is unattainable, but rather that the goal is more involved than, say, 'brush my teeth in the morning'.

If you goal is to brush your teeth every morning, there really aren't any steps to it after you have all of the provisions necessary. You just need to have the motivation to actually do it.
If you're trying to become a journalist, you're going to have to do some research into college or university programs, potential employers, you'll need to attend that schooling, you'll have to write a resume, apply for jobs, practice and hone your skills, among other things I'm sure. The steps to getting the necessary 'provisions' aren't as simple as 'enter the bathroom'.

Haha, I love these type of discussions, but I do find that the human love for 'opinion' often gets in the way when discussing the objective nature of subjective experience. After all, the God did it all, right?
I am a monoist in a scientific sense. I've studied the brain in simple ways by watching a huge series of neuroscience lectures (which was largely sparked by a brief period of marijuana use). Seems pretty solid that way. Biological machines. Mechanical animals.

However, in a philosophical sense, I stray away from the idea of monoist and do start to think that it is possible everything is the way that it is because of a sort of 'underlying natural form' that is separate from the things. In some ways I agree with the way Plato put it, that things have "essences". Qualia. The colour Red is and always was, and I cannot explain the experience of it.

I sometimes feel that this is the true nature of evolution. Not that natural selection isn't a real thing, but that evolution is a natural progression towards achieving a pre-existing expression of natural form rather than being simply a series of 'accidents' with no purpose. Sort of throws free will out the window, but whatever. Red plus Blue is always Purple. It just gets more complicated than that

Perhaps urgency is the state of "now"? The direct, moment-by-moment experience of consciousness which is the only place we can truly affect the outside world. Dreaming up the future doesn't create it, it requires action in the present moment to begin progression towards that dream. Regretting the past, or just dwelling on it, likewise has no external effect. It is only in the present moment that we do anything, and it is only in the present moment than we can.

At least, that's the way it appears to me

Existence sucks, and it's so damn persistent!!

A better word would be: "/not readily available goal/", I agree. But perhaps the 'brushing my teeth' is part of a 'staying clean' or 'having good teeth forever', both of which can't really be observed.

I'd call that 'awareness' and The Circle says that you can stay happy thinking that it is everything.
I figured out for myself what 'is moving' along the circle:

I think I'm closer to solving the motivation problem by also assuming happiness is desirable.^[5]
Man up: cut the Happiness you are getting from present things, in order to make the new Happiness more desirable in contrast. Crush the notion you have you can ever get that Happiness back. (With Sadness or Awareness or Fear^[6]. Not Determination at all.)
Believe: you need a out-of-reach goal, that isn't falsified/crushed; and it needs to relate to the results you get. (That doesn't follow from Teh Circle.)
This took longer to write than I thought. I have a vague notion of how silly this all sounds.

I'm starting to see this, too. Much in the way a particular room resonates at specific frequencies. There's just something that's naturally inherent in the system, by nature of the rules. As in, a cup gives birth to the water that fills it.

I'll often times look around and think "What a bizarre world!" only later to have had the thought lead me to a complete 180 with "Well what else would you expect? Seems pretty much as un-bizarre as we could make it!"

There's a real "inevitability" to the structure that is the world we live in, from the ideas that are born in our brains to the unique properties of the elements in the periodic table. It's very "has-to-have-been-this-way".

@Derezo
>I'm not sure I agree..

You went far in your thoughts!
And, however I see your thoughts as actions. As just typing them down here, is very very easy. The action here, is done by your mind and it is your thoughts. More than that, thoughts change the state of your mind, affecting your behaviour in matters may not require further conscious thinking at all.

@Weaponess
>This also implies a greater somewhat unattainable goal is necessary. I think people usually refer to those as "dreams"

Indeed it does! And I hear it from people all around: having a "dream"(and following it)- is great. Best if it's something unachievable.

>Did you ever have a thought you knew was not real?...

I'm not sure I completely understand it, but looks like you claim sources of motivation aren't rational.. To be specific I think we have to define rationality. If we have specific large goals, smaller motivations maybe very much rationally derived from the larger goals.. In various other cases, motivation maybe derived from basic will not to die, which is also rational..

>So the blue things are....

Wha? Though to be honest I think it would be wiser you don't try to clarify that to me. I'll try to understand it again, later. Jeez this thread is getting complex

>I think I'm closer to solving the motivation problem by also assuming happiness is desirable...

Sounds good. I wonder if it can be put together with what under the asterisks **

@Derezo & Weaponess
>A better word would be: "/not readily available goal/", I agree. But perhaps the 'brushing my teeth' is part of a 'staying clean' or 'having good teeth forever', both of which can't really be observed.

Well, here we go. For achieving a "bachelor of science" we had decided to "track the progress", which is somewhat visible with accomplishment of various courses.

How do you motive yourself to brush your teeth?
Doing it is vital, but it doesn't advance you anywhere.

***

Long ago I heard of a statement of being "here and now", and that majority of people actually do not do it. This means we learn to realize the things we're doing, get feedback from the things we're doing, and to learn to enjoy the current moment of our day to day life. I sometimes am getting in to that state, even while doing simple "automatic" tasks.. Works well if you're alone without anyone at home.

[edited grammar]

While I can't speak for anyone else, I am motivated by the feeling of millions of microscopic bacteria colonizing on their surfaces.

Meditation is the practice of being present and the number is rising. I read a statistic on meditation a few months back that showed something like a twice over increase in people who meditate from the mid 90's to 2008 in North America. I can't recall the sources, though.

Being in the moment and seeing things as they are can actually be very frightening. The truth is much stranger than fiction.

My love for the Buddha teachings tends to pit me against fundamentalists from both religion and science, not to mention the apathetic majority.

[edit]

It is only because I agree that I didn't respond to your post, Mark.

The reason dreams need to be vague is that you shouldn't be discouraged. I.e. you shouldn't have observations of it being not true.

It is justifiable and inherently sympathetic; but is it rational?

Don't try too hard to understand it. It's not made for that. Feel free to ignore my explanation... and drawing.

Now substitute the "It's" with "It seems to me" and think about it.