Frame control is an effect; very often, people who frame control will not be aware that this is what they’re doing, and have extensive reasoning to rationalize their behavior that they themselves believe. If you are close to a frame controller and squinting at them to figure out “are they hiding intent to control me,” you often will find the answer is “no.”
I wonder if you can infer de facto intent from the consequences, ie, not the intents-that-they-think-they-had, but more the intents they actually had.
In particular, a lot of motivated cognition often makes people not “believe” that the beliefs they explicit hold just-so-conveniently lead to giving them greater power and status, etc. But usually the degree of this reality warping isn’t absolute.
I’d be interested in dispassionately examining potential frame controller’s actions and noting whether their actions and justifications just so conveniently happen to always lead to them getting large personal gains at little personal cost, while incurring large costs (especially autonomy) of others.
I’d be interested in dispassionately examining potential frame controller’s actions and noting whether their actions and justifications just so conveniently happen to always lead to them getting large personal gains at little personal cost, while incurring large costs (especially autonomy) of others.
Sorry, do you mean this is “obviously” true for all humans, or only frame controllers? If the latter, I would consider this form of understanding intents useful Bayesian evidence for someone being a frame controller.
I wonder if you can infer de facto intent from the consequences, ie, not the intents-that-they-think-they-had, but more the intents they actually had.
I believe this is possible. When I was reading the OP, I was checking with myself how I am defending myself from malicious frame control. I think I am semi-consciously modeling the motivation (=intent they actually had, as you call it) behind everything people around me do (not just say, as the communication bandwidth in real life is much broader). I’d be very surprised if most people wouldn’t be doing something similar at least on the sub-conscious level.
The difficult part in my opinion is:
1) Make this subconscious information (aka intuition) consciously available and well calibrated
2) Actually trust this intuition, as the frame-controller is adversarially undermining your trust in your own sense making and actively hiding their true motivations, so usually your intuition will have high uncertainty
I wonder if you can infer de facto intent from the consequences, ie, not the intents-that-they-think-they-had, but more the intents they actually had.
In particular, a lot of motivated cognition often makes people not “believe” that the beliefs they explicit hold just-so-conveniently lead to giving them greater power and status, etc. But usually the degree of this reality warping isn’t absolute.
I’d be interested in dispassionately examining potential frame controller’s actions and noting whether their actions and justifications just so conveniently happen to always lead to them getting large personal gains at little personal cost, while incurring large costs (especially autonomy) of others.
Obviously. It’s interpersonally exploitative cognition.
Sorry, do you mean this is “obviously” true for all humans, or only frame controllers? If the latter, I would consider this form of understanding intents useful Bayesian evidence for someone being a frame controller.
Yeah, I think that’s a good heuristic!
I believe this is possible. When I was reading the OP, I was checking with myself how I am defending myself from malicious frame control. I think I am semi-consciously modeling the motivation (=intent they actually had, as you call it) behind everything people around me do (not just say, as the communication bandwidth in real life is much broader). I’d be very surprised if most people wouldn’t be doing something similar at least on the sub-conscious level.
The difficult part in my opinion is:
1) Make this subconscious information (aka intuition) consciously available and well calibrated
2) Actually trust this intuition, as the frame-controller is adversarially undermining your trust in your own sense making and actively hiding their true motivations, so usually your intuition will have high uncertainty