Comments on: Manipulation http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/ Dale Emery on Leadership Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:42:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Chris Morris http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/#comment-191 Chris Morris Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/17/manipulation/#comment-191 Excellent post. Although what makes this even trickier is a pre-test: Am I aware of what my true intentions are? Am I so good at manipulating that I don't realize when I'm doing it? Do I even know that I manipulate out of a very core desire to avoid conflict at all costs? It helped me a lot to be able to answer those questions honestly. Excellent post. Although what makes this even trickier is a pre-test: Am I aware of what my true intentions are?

Am I so good at manipulating that I don’t realize when I’m doing it? Do I even know that I manipulate out of a very core desire to avoid conflict at all costs?

It helped me a lot to be able to answer those questions honestly.

]]> By: Dale Emery http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/#comment-192 Dale Emery Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/17/manipulation/#comment-192 Chris, your comment reminds me that we are quite capable of manipulating ourselves. Chris, your comment reminds me that we are quite capable of manipulating ourselves.

]]> By: Dale Emery http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/#comment-193 Dale Emery Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/17/manipulation/#comment-193 One of my collegues pointed out a hole in my definition. It is possible to manipulate someone even if you tell them your intentions. For example, suppose a candidate wants you to vote for him for mayor, and as part of his campaign to win your vote he withholds information about the dozens of women he has sexually harassed. He is happy to tell you his intentions—he is trying to win your vote. Even though the candidate's actions pass my non-manipulation tests, I see them as manipulation. Purposefully withholding <em>any</em> relevant information, even information about something other than your intentions, is manipulation. And withholding information isn't the only form of manipulation. Another form is lying, willfully making statements false to fact. There's a word that covers both willful omission of relevant information and willful false statements: deceit. So I have revised my definition: <dl> <dt> <strong>manipulation</strong> </dt> <dd> <ol> <li>Influence by means of deceit.</li> </ol> </dd> </dl> One of my collegues pointed out a hole in my definition. It is possible to manipulate someone even if you tell them your intentions.

For example, suppose a candidate wants you to vote for him for mayor, and as part of his campaign to win your vote he withholds information about the dozens of women he has sexually harassed. He is happy to tell you his intentions—he is trying to win your vote.

Even though the candidate’s actions pass my non-manipulation tests, I see them as manipulation. Purposefully withholding any relevant information, even information about something other than your intentions, is manipulation.

And withholding information isn’t the only form of manipulation. Another form is lying, willfully making statements false to fact.

There’s a word that covers both willful omission of relevant information and willful false statements: deceit.

So I have revised my definition:

manipulation
  1. Influence by means of deceit.
]]> By: Brad Appleton http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/#comment-194 Brad Appleton Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/17/manipulation/#comment-194 Hi Dale! "Influence by deceit" definitely resonates better with me than your previous definition. I have some more questiuons ... Is 'deceit' simply one of several possible unethical means? Is it possible for me to influence someone via unethical means, without employing deceit as one of them? If they still make the decision I was influencing them to make, and they know the "truth" and the "whole truth", and if I was somehow unethical without being deceitful - does it make it "manipulation"? (Or does it mean I attempted to manipulate - but perhaps the target was not manipulated?) Hi Dale!
“Influence by deceit” definitely resonates better with me than your previous definition. I have some more questiuons …

Is ‘deceit’ simply one of several possible unethical means? Is it possible for me to influence someone via unethical means, without employing deceit as one of them? If they still make the decision I was influencing them to make, and they know the “truth” and the “whole truth”, and if I was somehow unethical without being deceitful - does it make it “manipulation”? (Or does it mean I attempted to manipulate - but perhaps the target was not manipulated?)

]]> By: John D. Mitchell http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/manipulation/#comment-195 John D. Mitchell Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://cwd.dhemery.com/2004/08/17/manipulation/#comment-195 Dale, Your revised definition is superb. Brad, (A) Ethics brings in the notion of a community's notion of acceptable standards of behavior. Deceit is an absolute, if you will. For example, in the marketing industry, deceit is not only ethical but expected. (B) I think that one of the distinctions that you're trying to bring in is the need for both honesty and candor. Dale,

Your revised definition is superb.

Brad,

(A) Ethics brings in the notion of a community’s notion of acceptable standards of behavior. Deceit is an absolute, if you will. For example, in the marketing industry, deceit is not only ethical but expected.

(B) I think that one of the distinctions that you’re trying to bring in is the need for both honesty and candor.

]]>