Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » [Philosophy] Observer-Observation Connection

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
 1   2   3 
[Philosophy] Observer-Observation Connection
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

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 :)

Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
avatar

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.

Ben Delacob
Member #6,141
August 2005
avatar

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.

__________________________________
Allegro html mockup code thread -website-
"two to the fighting eighth power"

Johan Halmén
Member #1,550
September 2001

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".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years of thorough research have revealed that the red "x" that closes a window, really isn't red, but white on red background.

Years of thorough research have revealed that what people find beautiful about the Mandelbrot set is not the set itself, but all the rest.

jhuuskon
Member #302
April 2000
avatar

I love chipotles.

You don't deserve my sig.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

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.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

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.

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?

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.

References

  1. But wouldn't they at some point be influenced by the production and launch of the satellite? Wouldn't they get suspicious of the look on your face, every time they mention they went swimming (and of course you peeped!).
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

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

@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]

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

type568 said:

So how can we pick the right "choice" to "help" them following their decisions, and achieving what they want?

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"

video

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

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

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'.

type568 said:

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

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

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

@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".

Quote:

& Expressing Observations and Feelings

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.

weapon_S said:

I'm starting to see a pattern: selective attention -> expectancy effect -> 'altered behaviour'.

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.

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

[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 :P )

First a parable:
Let's assume you had an 'aura' or a 'ghost limb', which you wouldn't be able to see. But some psychic could see it. He tells you to train it. He would tell you what movements it made. How would you ever train it without him telling what your 'extra body part' does? Even though it was a part of you.
(Or think about a robot with an A.I. not specifically preprogrammed for its limbs; and the necessity of sensors in that case.)
What you can observe is essential for what you can do.

So if somebody tells you: "you'll surely write some great code", the fact that you will write code, might not be new, but "great code coming from me" might be a new concept you'll be wary of, and able to pursue.
Now if somebody says[1]: "just find some distraction from the pain", "distraction from the pain" might be inseparable, making it impossible to be pursuing "distraction" without being concerned about "pain". Likewise if you say "don't worry about your body; you're not fat", it might not be inseparable to the other person form "fat". But even if you say "you are slim", in that persons mind "slim" might not be separable from "fat".
Saying things in an unnatural way might create a 'unique experience' inseparable to "(solving) the problem".
Likewise using free floating identifiers like "love", "respect" and "duty" can create a space for the other person to make his/her own 'sensors'/goals, helping to separate troublesome concepts.
Sometimes connecting things will create a 'unpermitteable' situation. For instance "me & and all my hard work" + "amounting to a worthless maggot" might be 'unpermitteable'.

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.

References

  1. Or substitute 'say' with 'try to convey'
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

type568 said:

Eh.. This guy describes an utopia,

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.

Quote:

We need the game "who's right" as well as "giving".

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.

Quote:

if you just "give" there will be people who'll be willing to just "take".

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.

Quote:

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

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 :P

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.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

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+ :P ;)

Quote:

all in spoiler

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. :-X

>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)]

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

I agree, with exception to this:

type568 said:

perhaps she really can't

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. >:(

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

type568 said:

Although it is a interesting topic, due to me being concerned about general motivation, and not momentary manipulation it's not relevant.

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

weapon_S said:

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.

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.

Derezo said:

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

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.

Derezo said:

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.

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!"

Quote:

"I can't" and "I need" are used superfluously throughout the culture here.

Yeah, agreed. Lame excuses to not change anything.

I need to do sometime like the game geometry wars.

It made me laugh out loud.

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

References

  1. As I consider 'momentary manipulation' and 'general motivation' the same thing, I make no distinction between 'indoctrination', 'inspiration', 'being tricked into something', 'vowing to do something', and whatnot, which I all consider 'motivation by conscious human action'. 'Violent' communication will not leave the listener in a pleasant state. That is not a nice effect. Yet, for instance if you motivate a junkie to stop using, he won't be in a pleasant state, it might be desirable.
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

@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

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

type568 said:

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.

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.

Quote:

Damn you're right.

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 :P )

References

  1. I prefer the word "linked to" as it expresses a mutual relationship. Ideally I would say "mutually effectuate", but that might be too confusing.
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

weapon_S said:

I think that whole video describes a way to communicate nothing.

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

Quote:

Sometimes you have to scream and kick to reach someone, perhaps destroying everything they hold dear.

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.

Quote:

You can't expect everybody to be motivated by the same prospects

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

Quote:

How wonderful and positive they may be. Isn't that jackal thinking? ;) "DO this! You WILL be better off!"

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.

type568 said:

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.

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.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

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

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:

(for)
One believes that petroleum price will fall. The arguments for it are the facts that Saudi Arabia claims to have spare delivery reserves, and growing popularity of smaller cars as well as hybrids and electro-cars.

(against)
Such a guy may miss the fact that there's insanely quickly growing developing market, which demands fuel.. And the fact that Saudis aren't stupid to sell their oil cheap by overflowing the market with oil.

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.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

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.

type568 said:

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.

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

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 :D

[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 ;D

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

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"}3vkP3.jpg

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

More than 10 seconds.

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

weapon_S
Member #7,859
October 2006
avatar

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 :P. Or am I missing something...

Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007

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

In capitalist America bank robs you.

 1   2   3 


Go to: