Completism

Psychology presumptions

A few psychologists think they are clever by claiming some people are dumb stupid human beings with irrational traits. In the era before self-driving cars, taxi drivers exhibited some odd behaviour. During the rainy days, some would quit work early. The rain brought plenty of customers in quick succession. Now, some would indeed capitalise on this and work all day making good money. The idiots would stop as soon as they earnt their normal daily target. But are they idiots? They may welcome those raining days as ones where they get to go home early and spend their afternoon under the covers with their partner. Yes, they could do a full day in the rain and have a sunny day off, but maybe the rain brings more jams and unpleasant driving conditions. Maybe we don’t want to sit about waiting for the heavens to open. Not everyone wants more money, not everyone cares about efficiency.

People selling houses, are notoriously good at presenting a false image. Some show the property when it is a glorious sunny day and at a time when there is less traffic building up on the road outside. If you do not care about your credibility, if you care nothing for being genuine then persuade, prod, coax at will. We can get people to do what we want by ignoring what they want. We know best, they are impressionable. I take all this back if a first aid kit is made in such a way that mistakes are avoided, and it does the job super well. The design guides us. That is all fine but ulterior motives are for skunks. It might be your idea of what is best, but be less autistic and think about who you are tricking, what is better from their point of view.

People find ingenious uses for little-by-little coaxing to make the world glide more effortlessly. Psychological tricks get adopted by greater numbers until there is a backlash. I am one of the many that object at the outset and dismayed by those that get carried along without making a fuss. Small forces add up to a large muscle working against the individual who wants to be freer.

What is the most common mistake amateur psychologists make? They make one observation and read too much into it. One observation is not a lot. Seeing someone do a similar thing twice gives you a fifty percent chance of being right. Three times and you can bet money on it. A lady arrived on holiday with a bruised black eye. We were told that she fell over a pushchair. We take their word for it. A few days later her partner stood up and apologised for their regular lateness. He made a point of saying that it was his fault and not his wife’s fault. At this point we are fifty percent sure that a punch was thrown. A third piece of evidence made us closer to one hundred percent sure. On the last day, she stumbled over to us and said “Jason, is not so bad really”. Now I am beyond certain. Make the initial observation, gather more evidence, but keep your mouth shut until you have at least three items that concur with your suspicion. Note: if Jason rather than his wife had turned up with a black eye, we would assume he deserved it. Further evidence would not have been sought. Perpetrators of violence in the home are not predominantly male. Too many assume the male-female ratio of victims is ninety-ten when it is closer to fifty-fifty.

What evidence have you got? Evidence is your saviour. Have you checked to make sure what someone is saying is true? Have you found evidence that goes against your beliefs, but decide to ignore it and focus only on the evidence that backs up your claim? Due diligence. Check with the person involved first to verify the claims. Due diligence saves a fortune in time and embarrassment. Our assumption might be right, but evidence has greater value.

Knifes can be used for cooking or stabbing people. In the right context, knives are helpful, good but they are often used to harm. Psychology can be used to help someone or to manipulate and take advantage of them. You can make someone seem crazy and unsure of themselves. You can make them doubt their reality. That is using psychology to harm. You can make someone feel crazy for not trying, not giving something a go. You can harm or heal with the same psychology tool. Look at the intentions. Even if someone is rather clumsy with that knife, they may have meant to do good. They may have been clumsy but wanted to cook you a nice meal in effect. Psychological ploys can help people, be used for good. They can also be used for bad effect. It depends on the intentions of those deploying them.

A cheater, a swindler, a chancer, will copy a good person in all bar intent. They try to emulate genuine decent people. Good people can look like bad people. Bad people can look like good people. A quick examination of the traits someone is exhibiting can lead us to the wrong conclusion. We need to uncover someone’s intent. That can take a while.

You obey an instruction to write a 1000-word essay on the qualities and uses of a vegetable. You were allowed to choose any vegetable to write about. You select tomato. You write with prowess and precision. Your essay is detailed and worthy of a good mark. The invigilator assesses it for rigour and accuracy. Not only do you receive a score of zero, but no explanation is given for why you are given zero. You recheck what you submitted and fail to understand what is wrong. Psychology is very much like this. We make assertions, we come to conclusions and have cause to think we are right. A tomato is classified as a fruit. We got the base premise wrong. We think we understand someone as we look at what we are presented with but fail to spot the base premise upon which we have made all our assertions. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Over confidence can be dangerous. Being frequently right before, does not necessarily make you right about the person you are analysing now. Check your facts. Listen. Ask more. Listen. Gather more evidence. Admit your mistakes. Be humble.