OK—I had been assuming that “dark arts” meant “use of techniques socially considered mean, nasty or evil; may be employed for either selfish or altruistic purposes”.
It seems the LW definition is more specifically about manipulation. (I’m just bringing this up in case any other readers suffered the same confusion).
This page on the Dark Arts points out “there’s no clear distinction between using these skills and regular social interaction”. Does the LW community consider “regular social interaction” to be a dark art, or is there some line you have to cross?
I once made a post about hanging out with cheerful, positive Christians in order to be more cheerful and positive, because a number of my atheist friends are also more negative and cynical. Someone commented that this verges on the Dark Arts. (Manipulating my own mind?) I’ve come to the conclusion that I can distinguish myself using Dark Arts from “regular social interaction” but I’m not going to stop doing it unless someone can prove that doing this harms others.
OK—I had been assuming that “dark arts” meant “use of techniques socially considered mean, nasty or evil
The meaning should be considered divorced from what is socially considered. Many things that fit in that category are not dark at all. In fact a lot of what ‘dark arts’ entail is doing things because they fly under the radar of social disapproval while still being effective. There are also many techniques that are socially considered mean nasty or evil while not being dark arts. Those techniques often also qualify for such labels as banal, honest, blunt and naive.
It seems the LW definition is more specifically about manipulation.
That’s the one. With an emphasis on persuasion via manipulation. But the concept runs into the same problems as manipulation does in general. The line between ‘manipulation’ and ‘actually having social skills’ is basically non-existent.
I don’t tend to use the phrase ‘dark arts’ myself. It’s too cute, rather imprecise and places the emphasis on entirely the wrong thing—including things that are not even objectionable. I talk about bullshit instead.
OK—I had been assuming that “dark arts” meant “use of techniques socially considered mean, nasty or evil; may be employed for either selfish or altruistic purposes”.
It seems the LW definition is more specifically about manipulation. (I’m just bringing this up in case any other readers suffered the same confusion).
This page on the Dark Arts points out “there’s no clear distinction between using these skills and regular social interaction”. Does the LW community consider “regular social interaction” to be a dark art, or is there some line you have to cross?
I once made a post about hanging out with cheerful, positive Christians in order to be more cheerful and positive, because a number of my atheist friends are also more negative and cynical. Someone commented that this verges on the Dark Arts. (Manipulating my own mind?) I’ve come to the conclusion that I can distinguish myself using Dark Arts from “regular social interaction” but I’m not going to stop doing it unless someone can prove that doing this harms others.
The meaning should be considered divorced from what is socially considered. Many things that fit in that category are not dark at all. In fact a lot of what ‘dark arts’ entail is doing things because they fly under the radar of social disapproval while still being effective. There are also many techniques that are socially considered mean nasty or evil while not being dark arts. Those techniques often also qualify for such labels as banal, honest, blunt and naive.
That’s the one. With an emphasis on persuasion via manipulation. But the concept runs into the same problems as manipulation does in general. The line between ‘manipulation’ and ‘actually having social skills’ is basically non-existent.
I don’t tend to use the phrase ‘dark arts’ myself. It’s too cute, rather imprecise and places the emphasis on entirely the wrong thing—including things that are not even objectionable. I talk about bullshit instead.