It is obvious that at least someone in this situation is in a state of illusion. How is it that neither a good education, nor the availability of information, nor a developed ability to think logically protect us from conceptual errors in perception and interpretation, how is it that we do not recognize manipulation and lies? Discussions, observations and reflections eventually led me to the way of thinking expressed in this article.
Here are 14 common manipulations. Analyzing my life, I can say that I felt the effects of each of them at different times, and some of the brainwashing methods were truly effective in relation to me. I think these are well-known attacks. I have organized them into a list and tried to describe the mechanisms and reasons why, despite their triviality, they are quite effective.
I do not consider elementary influences such as bribery, blackmail and intimidation. In this article I am only interested in attacks that force us to live in illusion.
At the end of the article, I will also try to answer the question of why lies can easily deceive our intellect and, moreover, use it for our own benefit, why our education and availability of information do not help us.
This is not an article on psychology or an article on philosophy, if only because this article will not provide a single link.
Terminology
Because
I'm trying to understand how these manipulations work, then I had to introduce some concepts and consider some patterns. AAVD
=
A
absolutely
A
adequate
B
perception
of
reality This is a hypothetical state that is an infinite approximation of adequacy.
The concept is introduced to illustrate certain patterns and connections. A sufficient condition for AAVD is absolute IML. Explanation
AAVD is error tolerant. So, if you remove, distort or add a certain number of facts, then AAVD allows you to detect errors and restore the true picture of the world. Because all facts and events are what happened in the past, then we can say that AAVD allows
- restore a picture of the past
If we talk about the future, it is obvious that AAVD allows
- predict the future
Indeed, if you accurately understand all the relationships, understand in which direction the situation is developing, then you can predict the future.
Note
It is not clear how accurately you can predict the future even with an AAVD. So, if we assume that there is still freedom of choice, then we cannot accurately predict events. The question is whether we can (given freedom of choice) accurately predict the probabilitypossible events also has no answer, because the probabilistic characteristics of “freedom of choice” have not been studied. But it still seems clear that the closer your perception of reality is to the AAVD, the more accurately you can predict the future.
Absolute IML
(
IML
=
Information
,
Thinking
abilities,
Logic
)
Explanation
If we hypothetically assume that someone has
- complete and accurate information (an endless amount of information)
- infinite thinking abilities (in computer terminology - infinite computing power)
- has impeccable logic (in computer terminology - to have a correct calculation algorithm without errors)
then this subject (with the capabilities of God) has complete and accurate information on all facts and their relationships, that is, his picture of the world accurately describes reality, and he has AAVD. We will call this triad absolute IML. AED
=
Adequate
perception
of
reality
_ _
Explanation
Adequacy is a relative concept. It is impossible to accurately set a boundary and say that before this boundary you have adequate perception, but after that you do not. But more or less we can say that this picture of the world is more adequate, and this one less so. Two criteria can be used to compare the degree of adequacy:
- How well do the facts of the past fit into the individual’s picture of the world?
- how well can he predict the course of events?
Note
In reality, it is often impossible to mathematically accurately compare the adequacy of two pictures of the world. For example, if one picture of the world predicts events A, B, and another picture of the world predicts C, D, but in reality A, C happens, then which picture of the world is more adequate? Mathematically, it would be correct to rely on the amount of information contained in predictions A, B, C, D, which is associated with the probability of these events, but the problem is that in real life it is often impossible to find the exact value of these probabilities. But still, sometimes it's quite obvious. Let's compare, for example, the perceptions of the child and the parents. Parents are much better at predicting developments.
The picture of the world
is our interpretation of reality.
Explanation
Due to the strong limitations of the IML, when we talk about the “picture of the world” of an ordinary person, it is obvious that this picture may contain a lot of inaccurate, secondary information, opinions of other people, rough generalizations, erroneous logical constructions, and all this is richly intertwined with emotions . A person cannot take in everything with a single glance; his perception and his picture of the world are fragmentary. The question may arise: does it make sense to talk about adequacy at all? Perhaps in all situations everyone is always mistaken, but each in their own way?
Yes, it is obvious that a person cannot understand the situation in all details.
But despite all the limitations, it can be argued that a person is able to understand the essence. Based on this understanding, he can make both correct predictions and correctly filter out false information. The small regeneration cycle
is a cycle that allows, on the one hand, to build a correct picture of the world from true facts, and on the other, a correct picture of the world allows you to filter out false ones, correct erroneous ones, and add missing facts. In this way, self-tuning to the truth occurs.
Explanation
The ability to restore the true picture of the past gives rise to the possibility of “self-tuning to the truth.” Let's call this a “small regeneration cycle”. The point is that some amount of false information can be filtered out because the information is inconsistent with other facts.
Note
A small cycle means that this is “internal” work. The word regeneration means that this work is aimed at reproducing the picture of the world.
It reflects the fact that, on the one hand, the true picture of the world is supported by a sufficient amount of true data, but on the other hand, the picture of the world allows errors in the data to be corrected.
The large cycle of regeneration (cycle of experience)
is a cycle that allows, on the one hand, to predict the development of events based on the true picture of the world and take actions based on this, and on the other hand, by analyzing the result of these actions, to correct the picture of the world. In this way, self-tuning to the truth occurs.
Explanation
The ability to predict also leads to "self-tuning to truth." Let's call this the “cycle of experience” or the “great cycle of regeneration”.
Note
The Big Cycle means that it is an “external” activity consisting in the relationship between the individual and reality.
The essence is that, based on his picture of the world, an individual makes a prediction of the development of events and acts in accordance with this prediction. If for some reason an error has crept into his worldview, then the situation may begin to develop differently than he expected. Analyzing this, the individual realizes that his picture of the world is false and corrects his vision.
In principle, it is not necessary to act on your own; it is enough to make predictions and observe.
This also speaks to error tolerance.
As a result of his activity, a person receives additional facts, and these facts allow him to correct his picture of the world. False minor regeneration cycle
- in the case of weak IML, a false picture of the world may begin to incorrectly filter out facts, leaving or adding false ones and ignoring true ones, while this set of facts (along with erroneous data) will support this false picture of the world. This is how the illusion is maintained.
Explanation
This can be represented by the following chain.
- Distorted facts create a distorted picture of the world. This process is aggravated by logical errors and insufficient thinking abilities.
- Distorted perception “completes” missing facts in accordance with a false picture of the world.
- Thus, we get a self-sustaining process of “tuning” to a false picture of the world.
False large cycle of regeneration (false cycle of experience)
- in the case of weak IML, based on a false picture of the world, the individual makes incorrect predictions and takes appropriate actions, while the result of these actions (not positive) is interpreted incorrectly (as positive), which supports this false picture of the world . This is how the illusion is maintained.
Explanation
Also, in the process of a false cycle of experience, the individual will change reality so that it corresponds to his picture of the world.
For example, he will gravitate towards an environment that supports his false picture of the world and avoid an environment with a disharmonious worldview. Compensation mechanisms
The main mechanisms that give adequacy to the picture of the world and ensure “self-cleaning” of errors are the large and small regeneration cycles. But a person, also due to the weakness of the IML, is forced to use certain compensatory techniques that impose restrictions on the effectiveness of these cycles. Four such mechanisms can be distinguished: generalization, emotional charge, the opinions of surrounding people and meaning. Each of them has a “cementing” property, depriving us of flexibility and “preserving” our worldview.
Generalization
Let's say you know someone well. You have a certain idea about this person. What is this, this show? Due to the very limited human thinking abilities (computing power), you cannot constantly operate with all this huge amount of facts associated with this person. When you think about this person, and, for example, try to understand whether the new information that you learned about him is true or false (small regeneration cycle), you are not actually trying to remember, you are operating with some generalizations and abstractions that you associate with by this person.
For example, you may have a general feeling that this person is good, honest, decent, or, conversely, that he is not worthy of trust, that he can deceive, that he is cunning and selfish... This is a generalized mental perception (expressed in the abstractions good/bad, honest/lying, ...) is a kind of integral perception based on your experience of communicating with him and the information that you have.
In principle, without emotional support, generalizations themselves do not have a strong “cementing” property, but still, even purely logically, I can assume that they still contribute to fixing the picture of the world (making your perception less flexible). I can give 2 reasons:
- generalizations (and emotions, about which a little later) are quite discrete. Therefore, it is even purely logically clear that such discrete averaging is stable
- we use generalizations to avoid thinking about the details, so something significant must happen for us to pay attention and reconsider our previous conclusions
But still, just a generalization is a fairly rational action and therefore I don’t think that it greatly “cements” perception.
But if an emotion is “attached” to this generalization, then this can really “cement” the picture of the world. Emotional charge
Note:
I don't understand where the exact line between feelings and emotions is, or if there is one. Therefore, despite the fact that in this article I do not talk about feelings anywhere, I admit that somewhere the terminology is not entirely correct and we need to talk more about feelings.
We are often prone to a good/bad dichotomy (“from love to hate there is one step”).
This creates a strong level of discreteness in our emotional perception. And in this case, as in the case of generalization, it is mathematically clear that the averaged (and emotion is also an averaging, since it is a kind of integral perception of a person) discrete value becomes weakly sensitive to individual facts.
Perhaps there are other reasons related to the fact that emotions are largely in the realm of the unconscious, and reasonable arguments do not always have the desired impact.
But, I think it is obvious that in the case of our example, if you, for example, have a strong negative (or positive) attitude towards a person, then this attitude (this picture of the world) is quite stable and difficult to change with individual facts. Even if you are wrong and think bad (or good) about a person undeservedly, a false small regeneration cycle will discard facts that do not correspond to your “fixed” picture of the world.
Opinions of surrounding people
Using the knowledge and conclusions of other people is certainly also a compensation for weak IML. We don't have all the facts, and we can't verify everything ourselves. We have to trust other people and rely on information from them, their calculations and conclusions. An important factor is not only the quantity, but also the degree of trust. So, if the information comes from a person you trust, then the degree of trust in this information increases. If this person is an authority for you, then you are more likely to believe his picture of the world than your own observations and conclusions.
The “cementing” factor here is that if the people around you who you like share your point of view, then this gives strong stability to this picture of the world. You perceive the opinions of the people around you as facts (if you like them, with greater weight).
Note 1
In the case of authoritarian regimes, this factor is used together with an emotion, usually fear. A typical situation is that people try to “think like everyone else.”
Note 2
In the modern world, the world of social networks and the ability to shape our environment in accordance with our idea of life, the power of this factor is increasing. We can have different points of view and choose an environment with a similar worldview. This gives rise, for example, to such strange phenomena as the society of followers of the flat earth theory.
Meaning
If the previous 3 “cementing” elements affected the small regeneration cycle, then the meaning is associated with the large regeneration cycle. Meaning is used as a kind of parameter by which we could measure how adequate our picture of the world is in the cycle of experience.
In fact, in specific situations it is often more reasonable to talk not about the meaning, but about the goal, but the goal, if it is set consciously, must be meaningful.
Note 1
The imposed goal is not always false. For example, the entire process of teaching young children is usually about imposed goals. The task of parents and teachers is to understand what is really important and interesting (makes sense) for the child.
A false imposed goal is always associated with a myth. In this case, by myth I mean a false picture of the world that is used to explain the imposed goal.
Example
If you are forced by brute force to do something, without any explanation (without a myth), and in the end you become forced to somehow live with it and “accept” this picture of the world (resigned), then you yourself will create a myth why this needs to be done. An example is Stockholm Syndrome.
The emotional perception of the situation is determined by this factor. You are annoyed by what prevents you from achieving your goals, and you are attracted by what helps. This seems to be the most powerful "cementing" factor. Therefore, in the modern world the battle is fought primarily for minds. This diagram displays the concepts introduced above in their relationships:
Now we have a sufficient number of tools for analysis.
Irritation, psycho, anger.
This is a little more complicated. The very essence is to piss a person off for a specific purpose.
Well, it is obvious that an irritated person has much worse control over emotions and actions and the likelihood that he will make a mistake somewhere always increases. For example, in a dispute.
In business, such mistakes are often called “emotional decision making.” And in life in general too.
They drove me crazy, I freaked out, and I didn’t sign a contract with this supplier. And as a result, it was intercepted by your competitors.
Well, really, there are a lot of examples.
Another very important point is that a person who is calmed down after irritation is more easily suggestible at that very moment.
In this case, the scheme is as follows: the object is driven out of itself in some way. For example, some absurd proposal. Having reached a certain point of irritation, you need to stop IN TIME (this is the art of manipulation!) and begin to calm the person down. And at the same time, calming him down, we can slowly begin to offer the option that we set out to push through initially. And naturally, against the backdrop of the first absurd option, it looks much more attractive than if we had just proposed it.
The scheme is classic. Alternatively, you can use two people: one for the absurd option, the other for calming down and offering a target option. Moreover, the second person must have greater authority than the first.
The obvious disadvantage of this method of manipulation is the complexity of implementation, but the undoubted advantage is the power of the effect over a very short period of impact.
Reasons for inadequate perception
The reason for the decrease in the degree of adequacy is the weakness of the IML, namely:
- blocked, distorted or false information
- limited thinking abilities (in computer terminology - insufficient computing power)
- logical errors (in computer terminology - an error in the calculation algorithm, bugs)
All this is a field for attacks on our attitude to reality with the aim of manipulating consciousness. Let's look at each of these aspects.
Insufficient, distorted or false information
This is the most obvious cause of distortion in perception.
She's completely natural. It is clear that if you do not have sufficient information, it is difficult for you to get an idea of the situation. This is also one of the most common methods of manipulation. Essentially, when we talk about distortion or false information, we are talking about deception. In the case of simple deception, the picture of the world can be easily restored by providing the true facts. But modern realities show that with certain types of manipulation, a false picture of the world has amazing stability, and “true data,” even if available, often cannot win in the competition for the status of truth with outright lies and fakes. This effect can be called “brainwashing”, and all our examples will concern precisely such situations.
Manipulation 1. Othello
This is manipulation aimed at a specific person, taking into account the specifics of his character and perception in order to discredit another person or in order to influence his attitude towards a certain situation.
Let's look at the famous story of the relationship between Othello and Desdemona from the point of view of the new concepts introduced and the patterns described. Then, using the dry language of analysis, Othello's attitude towards Desdemona was changed with the help of false information. This information was presented in such a way as to give Othello a certain view of the situation. A jealous character gave this new picture of the world a strong negative emotional charge, which created a kind of potential minimum for such an interpretation and deprived Othello (strong negative emotion) of the ability to think logically. When a false picture of the world was formed, a false small cycle of regeneration began to work, which supplanted the true facts, ceasing to take them into account. A cycle of false experience also began. A false goal appeared - revenge, which guided his actions.
Manipulation 2. Fake news
An interesting (and unexpectedly effective) technique is to create a fake news cycle. Each such news, being in the wake of a certain (false) point of view, fits into a small cycle of false regeneration and “feeds” the negative emotion associated with this inspired picture of the world. And despite the fact that this news is refuted after some time, it acts as fuel for this emotion, which in turn “cements” the false picture. This leads to the fact that even realizing that this news was false, the person who fell under the influence of this manipulation continues to maintain this false picture of the world. Also, as already mentioned, negative emotion affects the second and third elements of the IML, narrowing the individual’s analytical abilities.
Manipulation 3. Denigration
The next common, simple but very effective technique is denigration. Essentially similar to the previous two. A (false) negative image of a person is created. The information may contain a large percentage of lies. It doesn’t matter that after some time it turns out that this is a lie. The main thing is that the emotion will be “glued” to this person. Then you can “work” on this image, process this “reality” with a sequence of fake news, which will be “fuel” for this emotion. The difference from the example with Othello is that here, along with emotion, the “opinion of surrounding people” is used to give stability to a false picture of the world. The media is used for this.
Manipulation 4. On the blue eye
“A white lie” means that a person deliberately lies, but at the same time skillfully creates the feeling that he is telling the truth. The essence of this manipulation is that the attacker, through his behavior, tries to win over and thus increase the degree of trust in this information. In the case of using the media with good artistic skills or training, this attack on the minds is most likely successful, at least for a certain target group, which can then quickly “unite” through social networks, thus creating a “fixation” of the picture of the world in accordance with factor “opinion of surrounding people”.
Manipulation 5. Propaganda
This is an aggressive, persistent and long-lasting distortion of the worldview.
This is a direct, massive attack on the minds. The more power used, the more efficient it is. In fact, a certain myth is created, and this myth is instilled in others. In this case, the emotion of fear is often used. To do this, it is demonstrated that if someone actively disagrees with this picture of the world, then this person will have problems - from inconvenience to real danger to life (deterrence). This is a favorite technique of totalitarian regimes, but it can also be a less bloodthirsty situation, for example, in the case of sects, or some companies (which sometimes resemble cults) or some groups. This attack, using fear, first hits the second and third elements of the IML of the target group (accordingly, for which this is the weak link). Further, as this group grows, the factor “opinion of surrounding people” becomes increasingly important.
In the case of sectarianism and some ideologies, this may not be fear, but “bright feelings” associated with a sense of brotherhood, meaningfulness of existence, or it may be the result of various psychophysical techniques elevated to the category of a cult. But still, the good/evil dichotomy underlying these myths always has fear as the other side of the coin.
Manipulation 6. The Godfather
This attack is based on a dichotomy - cruel / kind, angry towards enemies, but kind to friends. Similar to the previous attack. Fear and myth are also used (see the next chapter) in the form of a kind of idea of \u200b\u200bgood and evil (which can even be formalized in the form of an ethical code). In this case, unlike the previous attack, the media are not used, and the action is limited to a narrow circle of “friends.” In principle, this is in many ways similar to the previous two cases (even down to the elements of sectarianism).
Limited thinking abilities
All four compensation mechanisms described earlier are also a consequence of the weak second element of IML, which means that any “brainwashing” using “cementation” is an attack based, among other things, on limiting mental abilities.
It's easy to see that all the previous examples fall into this category. But we can identify a group of special manipulations aimed at attacking this particular element.
Manipulation 7. Insult
In reality it is a primitive form of denigration.
This is a very common type of manipulation. Insult or name-calling is a kind of generalization, it is a kind of box into which a certain set of negative characteristics (and, accordingly, emotions) has been carefully placed in advance. But not only that, there are also instructions about what to expect from this person, about how he will behave. This is a way to “erase” a personality by classifying it. You can no longer pay attention to it. If we compare an insult with a regular classification, the difference lies in the presence of a negative emotion. The stronger this emotion, the more “cemented” the perception is.
Manipulation 8. Corruption
The essence of this manipulation is that a person is made a beneficiary of a false cycle of experience based on a false picture of the world (myth). There are two possible options
- conscious complicity (when a person realizes the falsity of the myth)
- participation with faith
We are considering the second option.
In this case, the fact that a person is a beneficiary “cements” a false picture of the world. For example, in caste societies, the upper castes sincerely consider themselves elite, despise ordinary people and believe that they have a deserved right to violence and exploitation. They are certainly the beneficiaries of this system of relationships, and their false small cycle of regeneration carefully protects them from all doubts. It is interesting to observe, and I think everyone knows about such examples, how some people change their views to completely opposite ones, becoming beneficiaries of a myth that they fought with some time ago.
Manipulation 9. Creating a myth
We have already discussed the meaning of myth in the chapter “The Picture of the World and Its Stability.”
Using the media, playing on already formed emotions (for example, resentment, hatred), and using authorities can really make a myth a powerful weapon. In fact, this is the direct introduction of a false picture of the world into consciousness. The danger also lies in the fact that these myths are often imposed in childhood and adolescence, when we are almost defenseless to such attacks. In the future, the myth may “die”, or you may independently realize the falsity of this worldview. But this worldview is not erased without a trace; its fragments, like fragments of a broken mirror, continue to live in us. Some of them fit harmoniously into the new myth, which carefully selects them, while others are stored in an inactivated state, thus creating a “backdoor” into our consciousness.
Manipulation 10. Emphasis
The essence of this manipulation is that you emphasize the events that confirm the myth, giving them great importance, and downplay or try not to mention, reducing the weight to zero, other events that do not fit into the proposed picture of the world.
Thus, even without explicitly deceiving, this attack allows you to introduce and maintain a false small regeneration cycle.
Usually reality contains a whole range of events. For example, a person can sometimes be kind, sometimes aggressive, sometimes depressed. In some situations he may look great, in others he may feel stupid... This applies to almost everything. There is always a spectrum. And if the weights of phenomena in this spectrum are placed incorrectly, then this forms a false picture of perception.
So, for example, when it comes to discrediting a person, the public’s attention is focused on those situations when the person did not look his best. These, for example, may not be the best deeds in his life or simply unsightly photographs obtained by the paparazzi.
Logical errors
Let's start with the fact that the lower a person's IQ, the easier it is to manipulate this kind of person. A narrow-minded person is easy to fool. But what was a discovery for me is that people with well-developed logic and IQ significantly above average still fall for these mistakes and use these manipulations themselves during disputes. Such is the power of the desire to defend one’s “picture of the world”, such is the power of the small and large cycles of regeneration.
Manipulation 11. Direct attack
The most primitive and yet one of the most effective attacks is direct insults or even physical attacks on an opponent. This throws you out of emotional balance and disrupts the process of logical thinking, which requires a certain degree of calm and comfort.
Manipulation 12. Trolling
A variation of the previous attack is trolling.
This is a more sophisticated attack. There may not be any direct insults. This is more of a form of bullying, but the essence and purpose remains the same - to unbalance. The effectiveness of this attack can be enhanced by creating a group of trolls.
Note
Both direct attack and trolling are slightly different from the other attacks listed here. At first glance, it seems that these manipulations are not part of a series of “brainwashing”. It is unlikely that the victim, after such behavior on the part of the opponent, will be more interested in his ideas. But let's remember the “propaganda” attack and the intimidation factor of dissenters. Typically, trolling occurs in a public space and is intended not for the opponent, but for the audience. They see how easily, cheerfully and sometimes cruelly they “trample” the victim. At least for some psychotypes, this is undoubtedly a powerful cementing factor and a “washing” manipulation.
Manipulation 13. Cutting the cause-and-effect chain
A very common manipulation. Similar to the “emphasis” manipulation. The point is that in the chain of cause and effect, a certain point is taken that is beneficial for the attacker and then it is considered as the original cause. The entire previous chain is ignored. A technique often used in the criminal world, when the victim’s natural reaction to provocation, in an attempt to protect himself and his dignity, is presented as the cause of the conflict, thus demoralizing the victim and instilling in him that he is to blame and must “responsible for ...”
Manipulation 14. Associative thinking
- Why did you call Marya Ivanovna names?
- And Vasya did the same. This is usually followed by the question: “And if Vasya jumped out the window, would you jump too?” This question should explain to the child that he needs to be responsible for his actions himself and not follow the herd reflex. I can understand why a child with an immature mind answers this way, but why do I constantly encounter similar arguments from adults, smart people?
They probably want to say something more. I can even assume that they just shortened their logical chain. But please unfold it. Explain to me what all these examples and comparisons have to do with it? The question was why YOU did it, and not Vasya (or why does this happen HERE and not THERE).
In reality, this is again manipulation. At the same time, our weak points associated with our past (for example, fragments of old myths that we were sick with) can be exploited.
Ways to manipulate consciousness
These are the simple but effective methods used by people who want to manipulate our consciousness. There is no doubt that such methods of influence are much less inhumane than direct violence common in previous centuries. But does this make them less effective? If we look at the world around us, we will see that it is not. These techniques are still effective. But it is much easier and safer to resist them - and each of us can do this.
We constantly detect plagiarism on our materials without providing a clickable follow link to them.
In this case, without warning, we turn to Google DMCA , which leads to pessimization of the plagiarist. On the contrary, we welcome the popularization of our materials, but with the obligatory active follow link to this page psyhosoma.com/manipulyaciya-soznaniem-top-10-priemov/ .
Common Misconceptions
Now let's look at a few non-trivial (such as low IQ, susceptibility to influence) common misconceptions
Confidence in being right
Unshakable confidence in one’s rightness most likely indicates a fixed picture of the world and false small and large regeneration cycles. The bottom line is that our IML is severely limited. We cannot say which information is true and which is not, or whether it is complete. Our logic is not flawless, and we are subject to various influences. Our emotions can deceive us. Our friends and everyone who thinks like us also has all these shortcomings. How can we be sure that we are right? It seems reasonable to always keep in mind the possibility that it is not your opponent who is mistaken, but you.
Making information more meaningful
I see this often.
“Wanting to understand,” people scan various sources and “study the facts.” Then they defend their point of view very convincingly. If you do not suffer from the same disease, then it is impossible to argue with them; they really have the information and “blame” you for not knowing something “important”. And... after a while it turns out that they are wrong. How so? To understand where the error crept in, let’s remember the “emphasis” manipulation. In fact, we are all prone to self-deception, for example, by placing the wrong emphasis in accordance with our picture of the world. Let's remember about fake news, which could also be perceived as a worthy argument. Let's add to this the fact that they can be members of communities of people with a similar worldview. I remember the political instructors in the USSR. Some of them really knew a lot. Their training allowed them to construct a convincing argument, with examples and details. Many were 100 percent sure that they were right. But then the myth collapsed, and it became obvious how distorted their interpretation was at times.
We live in an information ocean with a huge amount of false and unreliable information. Many topics are highly charged emotionally. If your picture of the world is false and strongly “cemented,” then it is very difficult for you to distinguish true information from false information.
Emotional underdevelopment
We have already discussed that the more discrete our emotional perception is (to the extreme, black and white), the more our “picture of the world” is subject to “cementation,” which in turn makes us vulnerable to manipulation. Therefore, developed emotional perception is an important condition for your adequacy.
Undeveloped sense of harmony
If you love abstract painting, then you must understand how important this feeling is when you are dealing with the chaos that is an infinite number of variations of shapes and colors. Due to the weakness of our IML, we cannot take into account all the facts, factors, dependencies, and we are actually in the same situation of chaos and we need to choose the most “harmonious” interpretation.
Seduction, temptation.
Who hasn't succumbed to temptation? Yes, everyone gave in. Who has not said the phrase: “do not tempt me” ...?
STOP!
Gotcha! You are being manipulated 
An everyday example? Easily.
You sit in the evening, finish all your chores, finish writing and come up with plans for tomorrow. You’re about to go to bed, but then you get a call: “Great buddy, let’s go and drink some cognac in the sauna.” Your reaction: “No. Tomorrow there is a lot of work - I need to get some sleep." And in response: “Yes, I’m treating you today, plus I also invited the girls.” Well, who is going to refuse further? We got caught out of the blue. We quickly got dressed and 15 minutes later we were already in the sauna with our buddy and the girls. Is it worth talking about the consequences? I didn’t get enough sleep, I had a hangover, and I didn’t get anything done.
Remember also the scheme of compromising the same politicians. Some Monica Lewinsky seduces her Bill Clinton, and he's trapped! And she: “I always take a video camera with me!” (With)
Well, we weigh our favorite: “ONLY TODAY! JUST NOW! 50% DISCOUNT ON EVERYTHING!”
Is it worth continuing?
The essence of the method is to catch a person with a key. I just caught it and that’s it. As a rule, he won't go anywhere. Well, then - twist the ropes, film them, sell the products.
Blackmail.
Another method of manipulation is most often used with direct influence, and (don’t be afraid of the word) is not necessarily illegal.
A primitively moronic example. The girl says to the guy: “Until you go to my store for a gold ring, I won’t give myself up to your good ones.” “golden ring” - can be easily replaced with whatever the girl wants, depending on each specific case.
Another example of blackmail, but this time illegal: The city administration tells a businessman: “if you don’t sell the store of your own free will, we’ll put a bunch of checks on you from various authorities, and they’ll find something to dig into.”
We even blackmail children: “Until you eat the soup, I won’t give you chocolate.”
It is very effective when it is not illegal, however, you almost immediately fall in front of the one you are trying to manipulate.
Intimidation.
A more cunning type of manipulation compared to the previous method. The point is to subtly influence or provoke a person's fears.
It differs from threats in that there are no direct demands. The result of exposure is fear. Fear, like irritation, contributes to the loss of control over emotions.
In business. For example, you can convince a person that he will lose his money, so it’s better for him to invest the money somewhere (for example, in your friend’s business).
Naturally, in this case, the impact is on “insecurity” and not on the coolness of a friend’s business.
In business relationships
Manipulations in business communication, their presence or absence, depend more on the professionalism of the employee and his confidence in his abilities. It is difficult to influence a person who knows his own worth. If the employee is incompetent or too shy to emphasize his merits, the employer or colleagues will not fail to take advantage of this.
Common methods of influence in a work environment are:
- ridicule, reproaches; the recipient is nervous, irritated and performs the actions necessary for the manipulator;
- demonstrative resentment is a reluctance to admit one’s point of view is wrong, and the addressee will try to fulfill all the whims of the offended person;
- flattery and support are intended to reduce a person’s vigilance and make him a victim of influence.
Manipulation in business communication can be avoided if you clearly express your opinion (which is obviously correct) and be confident in your professional qualities. During the impact, you can try to interrupt the conversation with a phone call or urgent matter. Even a simple change of topic of discussion will help avoid manipulation.
Impact of self-doubt
In this case, the manipulator presses with his authority. It directly indicates the incompetence of the addressee in certain matters. For example: “You must listen to me - I have lived my life! You can’t do anything without me,” “Actually, I’m the boss here, so it’s up to me to decide how this should be done.” Such self-affirmation at the expense of another can take place at different levels and on different issues. The impact will continue until the recipient gets rid of his uncertainty, weakness and acquires the necessary skills.
Love.
Let's return to the conversation about women at the end of the first part of our conversation.
There are three main schemes (for two people):
a) one loves, one doesn’t love.
b) both love.
c) both don’t like.
The first one is simply mega-popular and effective. Manipulators are usually those whom they love. Moreover, manipulating those who love them literally becomes a drug. And the one who loves understands that he is being manipulated, but cannot do anything.
The second one is banal. “Do you love me?” Then…". There is nothing supernatural.
The third, according to the manipulator's plan, should be reduced to the first. That is, task number 1 is to make a person fall in love with you, and then act according to the first scheme. “Girls from clubs are looking for stupid rich boys” - I think you know what I mean.
Alternatively, you can “fly” with the third scheme and fall in love yourself. Or you can “get there” so that you both fall in love. Here you can’t guess who benefits, although in theory it’s for both.
A pity.
He took pity on the dog and made it his faithful dog. Losers love to be pitied. Straight out orgasm.
Having pity on the loser, you can twist ropes out of him.
In reality, you need to be careful when they try to feel sorry for you. I'm not calling to treat everyone with suspicion, but still.
We sent a couple of examples.
We feel sorry for the employee from the previous point about pride: “what have you done? Well, it’s okay, it doesn’t happen to anyone, poor fellow,” where we gain even more trust, and then after a while we divorce according to the old scheme.
Another short example: A girl feels sorry for a man.
Is it worth continuing?
The main thing you need to remember is PITY FOR THE PATHETIC, and simply do not allow yourself to be pitied. This is the way of a man, nothing can be done. Girls can be allowed, but only in such a way that they control it.
PS When girls ask to be pitied, they are not necessarily manipulating you. They may really lack your attention. But you shouldn’t regret the real mistakes. This is where manipulation comes in.
In family relationships
The most common family manipulations are hysterics, silence, demonstrative departure “to mom’s,” partying with friends, and drinking bouts. Psychological influence is used by both parents and children. This is a way to achieve your own benefit by playing on the feelings of others.
To avoid such influences in the family, you should learn to trust each other and openly discuss your desires and actions. Perhaps, at first, conflict situations will be a frequent occurrence. Over time, relatives will learn to calmly talk about their goals and motivations. But there are also constructive manipulations that can inspire a spouse or child to new achievements.
Manipulative techniques
Often these reactions come from childhood, so the most effective manipulative techniques are based on typical phrases that parents once uttered. The similarities can be easily seen in the examples.
Pressure for pity
As a child: “You’re going to a party and grandma isn’t feeling well! Stay at home, take care of her, there’s no one else.”
Now: “Of course, you are on vacation now, but we have a very important project planned, and without you it will be difficult to complete everything efficiently. Will it be possible to go on Skype in the evening?”
According to Eric Berne's theory, in such a message, two “adult” colleagues communicate on an explicit level, and on a hidden level, the boss takes the position of a “child” who asks the “parent” to help him. Rarely does anyone miss the opportunity to feel like a savior in such a situation. A sense of self-worth is one of the most insatiable human needs.
Guilt play
As a child: “How irresponsible of you to go to a party when grandma is sick! We are exhausted, and you just want to have fun!”
Now: “You’re already on vacation, and we’re in the busy season, will you be able to at least get on Skype?”
The situation is the same, but the message is different. In this case, the position of the boss is parental, and the subordinate gets the role of a “child,” disobedient and guilty. Of course, in order to earn the love and recognition of the “parent”, the “child” will give up convenient vacation time, work overtime and work for three people.
Comparison
As a child: “Masha only gets A’s in her studies, but you even got a B in drawing!”, and in the opposite direction: “So what if everyone copied them, but what if everyone jumps from the roof?”
Now: “Your performance is the worst in the department, you should try harder” or “Inexperienced employees sometimes make such a stupid mistake, but I didn’t expect it from you!”
Situations of evaluation and comparison, when they are not in our favor, are extremely unpleasant. This technique has long ceased to be secret: “Best Employee of the Month” boards and leaks of assessment results are also management techniques based on comparison. Of course, everyone wants to be better than others, no matter how much psychologists, philosophers and lovers of thoughtful statuses on social networks claim that you only need to compare yourself today with yourself yesterday.
On weak
As a child: “You will never get into this university!”
Now: “The client is hesitant, doesn’t seem to trust your experience very much, maybe entrust this to someone else?”
Works well with people who like to prove themselves in extreme situations. When everything is calm and measured, they get bored and do their work carelessly. But in a situation of force majeure, they are able to show their best qualities. Skepticism on the part of the authorities will spur such an employee to prove his professionalism, perseverance and determination to everyone, out of spite. This approach is rude, so managers often use a third party to convey to the employee their doubts about his abilities.
Flattery
As a child: “You are the smartest! No one can do it better than you!”
Now: “I cannot trust this important task to anyone but you.”
When creating some kind of image in the eyes of others, we want to look like a holistic, consistent person and try to act consistently. Someone's faith and support can energize and give strength. Flattery can also be used to impose one’s point of view: “You’re so smart and you understand that the best option would be...”.
What are they needed for?
Manipulation in communication is one of the oldest ways of obtaining benefits in a given situation. This psychological impact is not good or bad. It depends only on the final goal and how to achieve it.
If a person feels that his consciousness is being controlled, he should figure out why this is needed and try to benefit from the new knowledge.
First, you need to decide on your goal. What does the manipulator want? Is this the only benefit for him? Perhaps its impact will also benefit the recipient. This is relevant in family relationships when parents are trying to teach a child to perform some action (for example, exercise). In this case, the goal is to take care of the recipient of the impact.
Secondly, you need to decide on the means. If during the influence the recipient suffers (experiences humiliation, fear, anger, or is forced to do something), such demoralization completely subjugates the person to the manipulator. But there is also influence through flattery - when a counterpart is convinced of his attractiveness or uniqueness. But in this case, the addressee does not suffer, but almost voluntarily submits to the manipulator.
Thus, the characteristics of manipulation in communication have a neutral connotation. Much depends on the personality of the active subject. If the process of influence is revealed, it loses its meaning. Therefore, you should not always interrupt what is happening. Sometimes it is much more profitable to play along with the manipulator and benefit for yourself.
