Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

A Buddhist Blind Spot ?

I just finished reading “Influence” by Robert Cialdini; a classic on human docile behavior; and I loved reading it!

For those who never heard of it; there are a number of shortcuts in our brain with an influence on our behavior. They usually work fine, but they can be used (and abused) by people who want to have influence on the decisions we make.

6 key principles of influence by Robert Cialdini
• Reciprocity - People tend to return a favor, thus the pervasiveness of free samples in marketing. In his conferences, he often uses the example of Ethiopia providing thousands of dollars in humanitarian aid to Mexico just after the 1985 earthquake, despite Ethiopia suffering from a crippling famine and civil war at the time. Ethiopia had been reciprocating for the diplomatic support Mexico provided when Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935. The good cop/bad cop strategy is also based on this principle.
• Commitment and Consistency - If people commit, orally or in writing, to an idea or goal, they are more likely to honor that commitment because of establishing that idea or goal as being congruent with their self-image. Even if the original incentive or motivation is removed after they have already agreed, they will continue to honor the agreement. Cialdini notes Chinese brainwashing on American prisoners of war to rewrite their self-image and gain automatic unenforced compliance. See cognitive dissonance.
• Social Proof - People will do things that they see other people are doing. For example, in one experiment, one or more confederates would look up into the sky; bystanders would then look up into the sky to see what they were seeing. At one point this experiment aborted, as so many people were looking up that they stopped traffic. See conformity, and the Asch conformity experiments.
• Authority - People will tend to obey authority figures, even if they are asked to perform objectionable acts. Cialdini cites incidents such as the Milgram experiments in the early 1960s and the My Lai massacre.
• Liking - People are easily persuaded by other people that they like. Cialdini cites the marketing of Tupperware in what might now be called viral marketing. People were more likely to buy if they liked the person selling it to them. Some of the many biases favoring more attractive people are discussed. See physical attractiveness stereotype.
• Scarcity - Perceived scarcity will generate demand. For example, saying offers are available for a "limited time only" encourages sales.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cialdini
Buddhist psychology does not recognize the importance of group-behavior, does it?
It tends to see people’s minds as islands where decisions are made on the basis of defilements or on the basis of understanding Buddhist wisdom.
But I’m not so sure that Buddhists would behave differently in any experiment on human behavior. Maybe they would use different phrases only when asked to explain why they acted as they did.
Could we have a blind spot here?
One example maybe is in another thread on this forum http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/18639/buddhistmuslim-conflict-in-burma#latest by @federica.
Buddhists can get into group-violence. How is that possible? The answer is probably complex but part of it is that we – like all other people – follow the authority or follow the crowd and our Buddhism very often has virtually nothing to do with our actual behavior.

I ‘m not sure this will make an interesting thread but my question is this: do you think that Buddhist psychology is poor and outdated? Does it start from a far too simplistic basic idea about human behavior?
Silouan

Comments

  • misecmisc1misecmisc1 I am a Hindu India Veteran
    edited May 2013
    My thinking says: any religion, if it is a religion, should have a spiritual path in it which leads to peace - whether we refer it as God, Self-Realization, Nirvana, Ultimate Reality, Buddanature or by any other label. now what usually happens is debate starts over these labels, with the interesting thing that none of the debators know for themselves with their direct experience what any of the above thing really is. the point is human beings are deluded because of which Samsara exists. until the ignorance is removed, defilements will remain and acts will be deluded - so whether the acts are getting out solely due to our own ignorance manufacturing it or by getting influenced by other people's ignorance , this does not matter much.

    Moreover if we take Buddhism then also all our actions in outer world get influenced from outside, (only exception may be Buddha) because Buddha taught about what he discovered about Dhamma to his disciples, and then later his disciples taught others and this continued on and on and today we study it from some source - so even if we follow the 8-fold path that also is influenced by some source - so there is nothing like some decision as an independent decision getting taken, though it can be independent, but still there will be some causes leading to it and so not totally independent.
    Silouan
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    zenff said:


    do you think that Buddhist psychology is poor and outdated? Does it start from a far too simplistic basic idea about human behavior?

    I don't think so. The root cause of objectionable group behavior is still greed, ignorance and hate of the various individual that make up the group.
    But I’m not so sure that Buddhists would behave differently in any experiment on human behavior.
    I think wise ones would if they were asked to do something unethical. If it's not unethical, then it wouldn't matter to begin with. For example, doing something that another person is doing like looking up in the sky. Doing that or having the tendency to do that, in and of itself, does not increase dukkha or make bad karma, so Buddhism would not even address that to begin with. Since Buddhism is only concerned with "suffering and the end of suffering". I don't think Buddhism even tries to address the entire range of human behavior but only the behavior related to suffering and it's end.
    Buddhists can get into group-violence. How is that possible?
    If none of the people in the group had ignorance, greed or hate in their individual mind, it wouldn't be possible!
    Maybe they would use different phrases only when asked to explain why they acted as they did.
    Could we have a blind spot here?
    I don't think "Buddhism" has blind spots. I think "people" have blind spots. :)

    riverflowMigyurInvincible_summerkarmablues
  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    How could anyone learn that s/he is not a copycat without being a copycat?
    Cinorjerzenff
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    genkaku said:

    How could anyone learn that s/he is not a copycat without being a copycat?

    Heh. A rather Zen type question. Good one.

  • or perhaps fill your cup with black tea...if the taste is bad spit it out and try green tea.
    zenff
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    @misecmisc1
    If I understand correctly, you’re pointing at the theme of the Buddha who put the Wheel of Dharma in motion. And from that point on this Wheel it is something bigger than just our individual paths; we are part of it; it is a group-process in time.
    That would mean Buddhism does acknowledge the power of a group-process
  • @zenff I honestly did not read all the responses to this thread, so Im not sure if you acknowledge group process as have just asked, but I feel that the sangha is what keeps the dharma wheel spinning. Its pretty obvious this has to be the way...Buddha is in Nirvana so he cant keep teaching in person anymore. So its up to us to continue to tell others.
    I do find it amazing how the Buddha predicted the future when he said not men nor angels nor demons can stop this wheel of dharma....2500 plus years later and on it turns. I always smile whenever i see the image of a dharma wheel.
    karmabluesperson
  • Reading zenff and seekers responses I must say you both have very valid points.
    riverflow
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    @seeker242
    I think the way you see human behavior is traditionally Buddhist maybe, but it has the blind spot that I mentioned. We can fool ourselves into thinking we made our own decisions on the basis of our inner motivations and all this money that they spend on campaigns and marketing is money thrown away. I just make rational decisions.
    That kind of thinking leaves us unaware of people pulling strings and making us do what we wouldn’t be doing spontaneously. And it’s not just about buying a brand of Cola. We get manipulated on many aspects of our lives.

  • lobsterlobster Veteran
    I hate that story.
    I would ask what there is to hate about an empty cup . . . doubtless you would fill me in. ;)

    Perhaps the story is not about one set of nonsense replaced by another but about emptying expectations.

    What do we expect from Zen masters - coffee refills?

    I feel it is an excellent admonishment to let go of our and our teachers 'wisdom'.
    The problem is as you say, some 'teachers' of zen are full of it, hence the need for critical appraisal.

    I love the story too.
    riverflowkarmabluesperson
  • misecmisc1misecmisc1 I am a Hindu India Veteran
    edited May 2013
    zenff said:

    @misecmisc1
    If I understand correctly, you’re pointing at the theme of the Buddha who put the Wheel of Dharma in motion. And from that point on this Wheel it is something bigger than just our individual paths; we are part of it; it is a group-process in time.
    That would mean Buddhism does acknowledge the power of a group-process

    my thinking says: whether Buddhism acknowledge or does not acknowledge the power of a group-process - this does not matter, because everything arises is due to its causes arising and ceases due to its causes ceasing - so nothing can be done independently as individually, and yet the spiritual path can be travelled only individually. :eek2:
    person
  • misecmisc1misecmisc1 I am a Hindu India Veteran
    edited May 2013
    kashi said:

    or perhaps fill your cup with black tea...if the taste is bad spit it out and try green tea.

    another zen story in short, if i remember correctly was something like this: a Zen master used to ask junior/new monks coming on retreat in his monastry - have you been here before? if a new monk says - no, then the Zen master would say - go and have a cup of tea. if a junior monk says - yes, then the Zen master would say - go and have a cup of tea. the trainer, who used to teach in that retreat, after seeing this asked Zen master, even if a monk has come here or not, you tell to both of them to - go and have a cup of tea - but why is this so? then the Zen master said to the trainer - go and have a cup of tea.

    seems like Zen involved only cup and tea, but no cookies with it. :crazy:
    lobster
  • I Like my Zen a little sweet...I always have a few cookies with my tea ^_^
  • genkakugenkaku Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
    If you like Buddha, fine. If you find sangha compelling, fine. If Dharma dissolves you into a puddle of applauding goo, fine. And if you find all of this dumber than a bedpost, fine.

    Yummy and icky are not so important. What is important, if you choose to follow a Buddhist path, is practice. Just practice and see what happens.

    Practice anyway.
    riverflowVastmindkarmablueslobster
  • I must agree with @genkaku
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    @genkaku

    Yes; ”just do it”. I think I heard that before (funny enough in a commercial, but let’s leave that aside).
    My musings are irrelevant, okay, I can live with that. Not easy, but I will get over it. :(

    But now that you mention it, why exactly is practice so important?


  • SilouanSilouan Veteran
    Human beings are social animals, and I would suspect like most social animals we have some sort of hierarchical sense hard wired in us for survival purposes, so if someone in the group spots a predator and looks up for example then if the others don't follow the lead they may die.

    What I find a little baffling, at least in the West, is that despite Buddhist teachings on the interdependent nature of all phenomena there seems to be a pronounced emphasis on the individual almost to the exclusion of others as if one's own enlightenment isn't dependent upon the kindness and compassion of others.

    Perhaps though this has much to do with the Western mindset of having an emphasis on individualism which can be argued was set in motion by the Protestant Reformation. It not only has had an obvious impact on Western Christianity, but has affected our entire culture in many ways, and now instead of one Pope we now have millions in all facets, including Buddhism, so maybe it’s a Western interpretation of Buddhism that has a blind spot..
    karmablueslobster
  • black_teablack_tea Explorer
    edited May 2013
    zenff said:

    @seeker242
    I think the way you see human behavior is traditionally Buddhist maybe, but it has the blind spot that I mentioned. We can fool ourselves into thinking we made our own decisions on the basis of our inner motivations and all this money that they spend on campaigns and marketing is money thrown away. I just make rational decisions.
    That kind of thinking leaves us unaware of people pulling strings and making us do what we wouldn’t be doing spontaneously. And it’s not just about buying a brand of Cola. We get manipulated on many aspects of our lives.

    We don't exist in a vacuum -- we are constantly taking in and processing stimuli, some of it unconciously. However, that doesn't mean that all decisions comes down to someone else pulling the strings, as you put it. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Marketers certainly do spend a lot of time trying to convince people to spend money on products and services that they may not actually need, even items that can be potentially harmful. Yet they don't have a 100% success rate meaning that we don't give up all our critical thinking skills all the time. We can be swayed at times, but we aren't mindless robots either. This of course can be applied to many things outside of consumerism.

    This means that we can work on ourselves and being aware of our thought processes, decision making and actions. Since Buddhism encourages people to do these things, it's hardly a blind spot. Being more aware of our thoughts and actions will help counteract some of the group think tendencies in our social species. Do remember that Buddhists are just ordinary people -- we don't necessarily start out with any great insight or self knowledge, it's a long process, so Buddhists aren't going to be automatically immune to some of these things.
    riverflowkarmabluesperson
  • John_SpencerJohn_Spencer Veteran
    edited May 2013
    Hey @karmablues - word!

    I love that Shakyamuni said what he said about Friendship (i capitalise the word).

    I tried to 'awesome' your post twice.

    The machine won't let me.


  • personperson Don't believe everything you think The liminal space Veteran
    Others have said it well, I just want to jump on board the sangha train.

    The influence of a qualified teacher and noble sangha are pretty essential parts of the Buddhist path and are means to address the points raised in the OP even if not explicitly point by point.

    There is a danger of jumping off the bridge in group think but Buddhism has lots of teachings about what is appropriate to hopefully self correct for that.
    riverflowVastmindSilouankarmablues
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    Yes, I think you guys have a good point in mentioning the ideas of "admirable friendship" and the importance of sangha.
  • footiamfootiam Veteran
    zenff said:

    I just finished reading “Influence” by Robert Cialdini; a classic on human docile behavior; and I loved reading it!

    Buddhist psychology does not recognize the importance of group-behavior, does it?
    It tends to see people’s minds as islands where decisions are made on the basis of defilements or on the basis of understanding Buddhist wisdom.
    But I’m not so sure that Buddhists would behave differently in any experiment on human behavior. Maybe they would use different phrases only when asked to explain why they acted as they did.
    Could we have a blind spot here?
    I ‘m not sure this will make an interesting thread but my question is this: do you think that Buddhist psychology is poor and outdated? Does it start from a far too simplistic basic idea about human behavior?


    Robert Cialdini may have his points. People are all different and most probably he speaks about the average minds. Do you think there is probably a mind that stands out, not Albert Einstein's mind but one like Hitler's who could get millions to do his biddings? Or the ones described in Buddhist psychology? Maybe Buddhist psychology is not poor or outdated- just that it is too advanced to make sense.
  • FlorianFlorian Veteran
    HHDL calls Buddhism a 'science of mind'. He does not mention that it is out of date.
Sign In or Register to comment.