If you've ever been in an argument on the internet you've seen this. If you start with one fantastic counterpoint and include a few weaker counterpoints -- whoever you're talking to will find the weakest one and attack it. They won't even remember the strong one.
Oh yeah? People remember! What makes you an expert on memory? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I'm sorry. I'm a Dad and I couldn't resist. Seriously, that's a great point. I wonder if it's related to people's tendency to strawman and/or to use red herrings.
I am a Japanese. I'm not good at listening, so this video was very educational. It's very easy to hear. And the material is very beautiful and the way of speaking is cool. I will come here again
The main listen of the video is "You cannot increase the quality of an argument by simply increasing the quantity of your argument" and "stick to your string arguments because your arguments don't add up in the minds of the receiver they average out."
@@whysosad2973 You can spot, if someone is trying to influence your opinion when this person is obviosly using the "rules" of the video. For example: if someone wants to encourage you to buy a stock and he says "Yes, I have too admit, it's not super safe and some people say, it's too easy and not honourable to make money this way."
@@nikhilvankar1609 Best part of the above presentation is that the quantity of arguments will reduce the quality of the argument. Hence avoid unnecessary explanation and stick to only what matters.
Yes... This is the first comment.... May be general populas is too dumb to understand what is being delivered to them or.... Or they are too genius and understand that they only havr to look at things superficially so that the words of others don't penetrate their hearts.
Agree. I think this is based on the behaviour of non-experts. Run the dishes experiment with actual interested collectors and you'll get a different result. This kind of faulty critical thinking makes sense when the thinker has a hard time understanding the issues.
True, However, I think that this would be the case when the stakes are high. When taking casual decisions, people rarely use their cognitive muscles, they let their subconscious take the decision.
Very true. Including more than one point in an internet argument is basically giving the other person a menu. "Oh, number 6 looks pretty easy to undermine."
I wonder how the passage of time plays into this Dilution Effect. Can you get more mileage out of multiple arguments by spacing out your delivery of those arguments? And if so, how much time is necessary? Do you need to give your audience a few weeks to mull over your previous argument before delivering a new argument, or can you just pause dramatically between each one?
Very interesting talk! I would be interested if juggling around the sequence of the side effects of the drug is enough to change the attitude towards it. Like, this drug might cause cold feet, ...and heart attack PERIOD. Instead of having the minor effects at the end.
So when i want to persuade someone about something good i tell them less good about it.And when i want to defend something bad i tell them more bad about it...We humans are pretty stupid huh...
Women know that by writing a long text to a man, he will only read one sentence and will stop focusing on the rest :D ....we still do that none the less. Brilliant talk. Always good to remind ourselves about such things
i didn't understand the last part related to pharmaceutical ads. including the minor problems diluted the severity and made it seem it was less harmful? is that what he meant?
Five persuasive techniques for you to become successful in life: Establish trust and develop credibility. Understand the reader's purpose and align your own. Pay attention to language. Consider tone. Use rhetoric and repetition. Cheers.
Nice talk with a good message. However, in the study example, "dilution," made a stronger case for buying the drug. So, the concept is situational. True, but situational.
Correct, because it was diluting the negative qualities of the drug. It diluted the counter argument to buying. What sold the drug is whatever simple message was put forward (ie lowers cholesterol).
But isn't telling only relevant quantity of information would mean, omission of other relevant information, because omission of complete information is considered wrong in many jurisdictions. In some cases organisations can be penalised
This dilution effect is regarding how people usually think, which is not completely rational. For professional analysis, complete information is very essential. There, the professionals would be using better calculations and be more rational.
yeah that bit was very un-relateable to me. I can imagine a set being priced that much, I couldn't imagine ever buying it though. Seems like a product for the fool & their money demographic.
Beautiful but still ...compare the video in its whole to its last minute. The whole is not true to its own medicine. The communication is diluted by too many examples. After a year I think it is clear the public in general did not notice this important but under convincing message.
I guess this can be used the other way around too? Like if you need to tell bad news about your performance to your boss. You can dillute the bad news with other less relevant bad news?
I believe that the faster you listen, the shallower the message goes into your brain. So once in a while, I listen to even the slow speech videos at 1x.
I can appreciate the speaker exploring the flaws of what we pay attention to and educating people about it for a change rather than selling out to ad companies or social media but to me it seems without direction.. ok there is this flaw, now what?.. isnt the whole point of researching flaws to fix em by compensating their detrimental effects rather than using them as loopholes?
Basically, he is trying to convey the message of speaking less and get to the point. but he spent more than 2 minutes and a half talking about the plates. I almost lost my patience. Although I like his main point, unfortunately, his talk showed me more "the counterproductive way to be more persuasive" 🤷
People are so weird! I would pay the same for both dinner sets and would have said that if I had to choose who had the bigger GPA I would have guessed Tom as he is more rounded as a person. The drug advert one is just crazy. It helps explain why our democracies are so dreadful. Sound bites are preferred to nuanced arguments.
there might be some truth to it but the larger set with btoken cups also represents buying into risk that the plates may in fact contain faults. you completely ignored this factor
I disagree. Broken pieces in a PREMIUM dinner set would mean that the set is no longer complete, and there would likely be empty spaces in its velvet-lined display case, or similar, reducing its aesthetic quality... which is important in a PREMIUM dinner set. It would also suggest that the set has suffered a big impact of some kind, and there may be hidden damage to the other items, such as imperceivable hairline cracks and weaknesses. You'd also have the added inconvenience of disposing of the broken items. I feel this talk attempts to brush over the complexities of purchasing items - and physics - with conveniently simplified strawman examples, whilst also suggesting there is no inherent value in things such as aesthetics, human intuition, and convenience.
The talks argues for keeping argument simple, and follows its own advice. I agree that the way people priced the items in the experiment is not unfounded. Which supports that the effect is real, even if not as irrational as portrayed, and that is enough to take advantage of the effect. The talk avoids the topic, and in doing so appeals to a larger audience. (This is my attempt to follow the advice, how did it go?)
@@Theraot You did well. As a software developer I have to reduce complicated things to 'layman's terms' constantly for people to understand, a skill I learned was essential years ago. Ultimately, all I'm saying it that the devil is frequently in the detail, and it isn't always a good idea to brush over it.
@@alanasand44 1 Upon close inspection, nobody is normal. 2 Perhaps you are not interested in cups. 3 Perhaps you have dyscalculia. 4 Nice profile pic, you're gorgeous.
@@fep_ptcp883 hahah!! I definitely have dyscalculia!! I’m also a big thrift store shopper so broken or damaged items don’t bother me. In a way I find them more beautiful! ❤️ and thank you so much for the kind compliment! You made my day!!
@@alanasand44 Nice, i made your day by simply speaking the truth, that's cool. You seem like a lovely person (don't know why) and just felt like complimenting you for your gorgeous pic, 'cause why not? And thanks for teaching me a new word, _thrift_ . I'm adding to my vocabulary. 😉
