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 ?
zenff
Veteran
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.
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sure this will make an interesting thread but my question is this: do you think that Buddhist psychology is poor and outdated?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?
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.
Buddhist psychology does not recognize the importance of group-behavior, does it?
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
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?
1
Comments
The psychologies you mention are used, perhaps unconsciously . . . Western dharma as it develops will be far more pragmatic, provable, documented and widely shared, sold and free sampled.
You have to appreciate we often start from vague new age sentiments, disaffection with Christianity or consumerism and so on. The skill set we bring is often sceptical, overly awed by foreign cultures or gullible . . . and many other starting points.
There is for me, vast treasures in Buddhism. Do we need to apply reason and understanding, yes indeed but . . .
A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master poured the visitor's cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The professor watched the overflowing cup until he could no longer restrain himself. "It's overfull! No more will go in!" the professor blurted. "You are like this cup," the master replied, "How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup."
http://users.rider.edu/~suler/zenstory/emptycup.html
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.
All of the social impulses and influences you mention would be part of the world that the monks are supposed to be leaving behind when they shave their heads. Of course, all you're doing is replacing the social interactions of the community with the ones of the temple. The million or so rules that monks are supposed to live by define this particular social world and uses social psychology to minimize individuality. What's fascinating is that the Dharma they practice then tells them enlightenment is an individual effort.
But that's an Eastern versus Western approach to what is supposed to give life meaning and probably oversimplifying. For a static Eastern society so bound in tradition, meaning is supposed to come from finding your place in society and where you fit in, not "finding yourself" as an individual like we're engaged in.
“Empty your cup first”
I hate that story.
It’s a teaching model I reject. But it is what Dogen said; “forget everything you know about the Dharma and follow the instructions of the living Buddha in front of you (the teacher).”
And that’s the way to make it through sesshin; don’t think about it, just do as you’re told and open the eyes on each side of your head; bow when they all bow, walk when they all walk, make gassho when they all make gassho and sit when they all sit. Authority and social proof is all that counts.
It is all so horribly uncritical. The story should say empty your cup first and then keep it empty. Don’t allow anyone to pour their nonsense in your empty cup.
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
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.
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.
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.
seems like Zen involved only cup and tea, but no cookies with it. :crazy:
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.
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?
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..
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.
In fact the Buddha has said that having admirable friends, companions and colleagues is a prerequisite to awakening:
"If wanderers who are members of other sects should ask you, 'What, friend, are the prerequisites for the development of the wings to self-awakening?' You should answer, 'There is the case where a monk has admirable people as friends, companions and colleagues. This is the first prerequisite for the development of the wings to self-awakening.'" (Sambodhi Sutta)
In another instance, when Ven. Ananda said to the Buddha, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie." The Buddha responded, "Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions and colleagues, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path."(Upaddha Sutta)
In fact, it seems the Buddha is basically saying that it is essential to be with admirable people so that they may influence you in a positive way, be examples of proper conduct for you to emulate and to provide you with wise advice when needed. ( See also Meghiya Sutta)
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.
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.
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.