You write in a gaslighty way, trying to disarm people’s critical responses to get them to accept your frame. I can see how that might be a good thing in some cases, and how you might know that’s a good thing in some cases. E.g. you may have seen people respond some way, and then reliable later say “oh this was XYZ and I wish I’d been told that”. And it’s praiseworthy to analyze your own suffering and confusion, and then explain what seem like the generators in a way that might help others.
But still, trying to disarm people’s responses and pressure them to accept your frame is a gaslighting action and has the attendant possible bad effects. The bad effects aren’t like “feel quite so scared”, more like having a hostile / unnatural / external / social-dominance narrative installed. Again, I can see how a hostile narrative might have defenses that tempt an outsider to force-install a counternarrative, but that has bad effects. I’m using the word “gaslighting” to name the technical, behavioral pattern, so that its common properties can be more easily tracked; if there’s a better word that still names the pattern but is less insulting-sounding I’d like to know.
A main intent of my first comment was to balance that out a little by affirming simple truths from outside the frame you present. I don’t view you as open to that sort of critique, so I didn’t make it; but if you’re interested I could at least point at some sentences you wrote.
ETA: Like, it would seem less bad if your post said up front something more explicit to the effect of: “If you have such and such properties, I believe you likely have been gaslighted into feeding the doomsday cult. The following section contains me trying to gaslight you back into reality / your body / sanity / vitality.” or something.
Ah. Cool, thank you for clarifying where you’re coming from.
You write in a gaslighty way, trying to disarm people’s critical responses to get them to accept your frame.
That’s not what I’m doing. But I get how it lands like that for you.
I don’t care about people accepting my frame.
But if someone is available to try it on, then I’m happy to show them what I see from within the frame. And then I respect and trust whatever they choose to do with what they see.
Frankly, lots of folk here are bizarrely terrified of frames. I get why; there are psychological methods of attack based on framing effects.
But I refuse to comply with efforts to pave the world in leather. I advocate people learn to wear shoes instead. (Metaphorically speaking.)
A main intent of my first comment was to balance that out a little by affirming simple truths from outside the frame you present.
Cool. I don’t respect the view of needing to Karpman-style Rescue people in this kind of way, but given how that’s woven into the culture here, your move makes sense to me. I can see how you’re trying to come from a good place there.
I don’t view you as open to that sort of critique, so I didn’t make it; but if you’re interested I could at least point at some sentences you wrote.
Correct, I’m not available for that right now. But thank you for the offer.
Like, it would seem less bad if your post said up front something more explicit to the effect of: “If you have such and such properties, I believe you likely have been gaslighted into feeding the doomsday cult. The following section contains me trying to gaslight you back into reality / your body / sanity / vitality.” or something.
Hmm. Yeah, if I were editing this piece over many days trying to make it really good, that might be a good suggestion. Might have filtered folk well early on and helped those for whom it wasn’t written relax a bit more.
And at the same time, I don’t want to focus too much on the cognitive level. That’s part of the whole point.
But the suggestion is hypothetically good. Thank you.
You write in a gaslighty way, trying to disarm people’s critical responses to get them to accept your frame. I can see how that might be a good thing in some cases, and how you might know that’s a good thing in some cases. E.g. you may have seen people respond some way, and then reliable later say “oh this was XYZ and I wish I’d been told that”. And it’s praiseworthy to analyze your own suffering and confusion, and then explain what seem like the generators in a way that might help others.
But still, trying to disarm people’s responses and pressure them to accept your frame is a gaslighting action and has the attendant possible bad effects. The bad effects aren’t like “feel quite so scared”, more like having a hostile / unnatural / external / social-dominance narrative installed. Again, I can see how a hostile narrative might have defenses that tempt an outsider to force-install a counternarrative, but that has bad effects. I’m using the word “gaslighting” to name the technical, behavioral pattern, so that its common properties can be more easily tracked; if there’s a better word that still names the pattern but is less insulting-sounding I’d like to know.
A main intent of my first comment was to balance that out a little by affirming simple truths from outside the frame you present. I don’t view you as open to that sort of critique, so I didn’t make it; but if you’re interested I could at least point at some sentences you wrote.
ETA: Like, it would seem less bad if your post said up front something more explicit to the effect of: “If you have such and such properties, I believe you likely have been gaslighted into feeding the doomsday cult. The following section contains me trying to gaslight you back into reality / your body / sanity / vitality.” or something.
Ah. Cool, thank you for clarifying where you’re coming from.
That’s not what I’m doing. But I get how it lands like that for you.
I don’t care about people accepting my frame.
But if someone is available to try it on, then I’m happy to show them what I see from within the frame. And then I respect and trust whatever they choose to do with what they see.
Frankly, lots of folk here are bizarrely terrified of frames. I get why; there are psychological methods of attack based on framing effects.
But I refuse to comply with efforts to pave the world in leather. I advocate people learn to wear shoes instead. (Metaphorically speaking.)
Cool. I don’t respect the view of needing to Karpman-style Rescue people in this kind of way, but given how that’s woven into the culture here, your move makes sense to me. I can see how you’re trying to come from a good place there.
Correct, I’m not available for that right now. But thank you for the offer.
Hmm. Yeah, if I were editing this piece over many days trying to make it really good, that might be a good suggestion. Might have filtered folk well early on and helped those for whom it wasn’t written relax a bit more.
And at the same time, I don’t want to focus too much on the cognitive level. That’s part of the whole point.
But the suggestion is hypothetically good. Thank you.
(Mainly for third parties:)
I flag this as probably not true.
It’s the same sort of thing your post is about.
I flag this as centering critical reactions being about the reacters not being relaxed, rather than that there might be something wrong with his post.