Manipulation: Morally right or wrong?

[Cyrus]

To understand my real question and how I'm defining manipulation, I offer this prologue:

Manipulation
(definition of manipulate: to handle or control (a tool, mechanism, etc.), typically in a skillful manner)

is different than deception
(definition of deceive: to cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage).

Manipulation is performed daily: every commercial is a manipulation, every movie in the theater that has a "message", every pep rally in public school is a manipulation. Presidents do it in their speeches and fashion magazine editors in their picture selections.

Everyday people manipulate too. Flirting is a manipulation. Dressing up for an interview is a manipulation.

They are all attempts to control the variables in our environment or to control the people or situations around us.

SO... is it wrong?

There's more: the reason this question even came up is because I have a friend who is so gifted at manipulation that at an unhealthy time in her life, she used it to her own gains and she used it so effectively that the people she did it to did not even realize she had played any part in their decisions.

To her, manipulation takes away a person's choice, their free will. I had never thought of it that way.

Therefore, the question is:

Is manipulating someone moral? AND does manipulation rob someone of their free will?

 

[rawr]

i would say it boils down to motive, method (how you go about it), and ends (what you hope to achieve from it.) If it's a selfish motivation (which manipulation usually is), then yes, i would say it's wrong.

 

[TinyBubbles]

I agree with her, manipulation, however subtle, is a tool for subjugation. You're enslaving other people to conform to your expectations and desires, with or without their (or even your) acknowledgment. Is it wrong..? *shrugs* I don't know. Wrong or right depends on what happens next, imo. And if a person wanted to be manipulated, then you could say that not doing so is also encroaching on their freedom of choice.

 

[DrShephard]

Everything is a manipulation, arguably. Having a simple conversation with a friend manipulates them by encouraging them to speak back, or sounding disappointed if they don't want to hang out with you subtly manipulates them into saying yes next time or reconsidering this time, or expressing displeasure through a facial expression when they tell you about something they done expresses a manipulation for them not to do that thing again. We are not robots and, as such, we manipulate others and allow ourselves to be manipulated at various times.

If I had to put a line down where manipulation in that broad, general sense is acceptable and unacceptable, I would say that both the means and ends have to be benevolent and honest. Benevolence meaning it advances good in general, and honest meaning that lying about stuff isn't involved. Any corruption on those degrade who we are as people, I think.

Play, however, is a whole different story. I personally like games that are enhanced by malevolence. Games like Risk and Monopoly and grabbing all the powerups for yourself even (though they're all the same one) in that 4-player mario game for the Wii and then throwing your friends into whenever you can while they yell "GOD DAMN IT LUIGI!!"! Hurrah!

 

[Nixie]

I think DrShepard put it nicely and I agree--except that whole Mario nerd tangent thingy. We don't think of what we do as manipulation because of the negative emotions associated with the language. I think it makes a difference if you are aware that you are manipulating and make a conscious decision to be manipulative for your own gain. Your friend seems quite aware of what she is doing so it makes for the case that she is operating in a less than honest way. We all make choices in how we interact with others and if you follow a path of manipulation it becomes destructive because it warps your sense of right and wrong. I would think you begin to see people as only a means to an end and fail to make basic connections with others. Yes, we all manipulate but it is a socialization technique we learn at the hands of our parents when they start to teach us how we fit into our family, our society. Anything taken to an extreme becomes destructive.

 

[Oranguh]

but I'm so goooood at subtle manipulation.... I mean I know it's not good to be dishonest~ but but but~ I could just as well act the way I do without being conscious of my own manipulative motives, right? On top of that.... If I were to change myself into the character I adopt at the current social circumstance.... well that wouldn't be manipulative right? Moral questions are sooooo difficult ~ ~ ~ In the end I forgive myself by reminding myself it's out of good intentions.

 

[DimensionX]

Everything is a manipulation, arguably. Having a simple conversation with a friend manipulates them by encouraging them to speak back, or sounding disappointed if they don't want to hang out with you subtly manipulates them into saying yes next time or reconsidering this time, or expressing displeasure through a facial expression when they tell you about something they done expresses a manipulation for them not to do that thing again. We are not robots and, as such, we manipulate others and allow ourselves to be manipulated at various times.

If I had to put a line down where manipulation in that broad, general sense is acceptable and unacceptable, I would say that both the means and ends have to be benevolent and honest. Benevolence meaning it advances good in general, and honest meaning that lying about stuff isn't involved. Any corruption on those degrade who we are as people, I think.

Play, however, is a whole different story. I personally like games that are enhanced by malevolence. Games like Risk and Monopoly and grabbing all the powerups for yourself even (though they're all the same one) in that 4-player mario game for the Wii and then throwing your friends into whenever you can while they yell "GOD DAMN IT LUIGI!!"! Hurrah!

"Both the means and ends have to be benevolent"? isn't good and bad subjective? : P

apart from that I would agree with what shep's said.

 

[randomsomeone]

Is manipulating someone moral? AND does manipulation rob someone of their free will?

From my perspective manipulating someone at the level you described is wrong...or at best case a dead end, which makes it unadvisable. It assumes a position towards another that is not theirs to take.

 

[middle1]

Wrong. Healthy assertiveness should be applied.

 

[aeon]

To understand my real question and how I'm defining manipulation, I offer this prologue:

Manipulation
(definition of manipulate: to handle or control (a tool, mechanism, etc.), typically in a skillful manner)

is different than deception
(definition of deceive: to cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage).

Well, given your prologue, nothing you list below is a manipulation. Even allowing for a fuller definition;

manipulate |məˈnipyəˌlāt|
verb [ trans. ]
1 handle or control (a tool, mechanism, etc.), typically in a skillful manner : he manipulated the dials of the set.

 

[Faye]

Yes, it is wrong when it is used to take advantage of others. Is it going to stop? Not a chance.

 

[Arsal]

It's neither right or wrong, it just is.

Morality is subjective, and human nature cannot be quantified without bias. That said, it depends very much upon the circumstance and what the situation is calling for in question - without a context it is impossible to determine whether or not something is moral. However the criteria always remains biased and varies from situation to situation, therefore, any discussion involving objective levels of morality is futile.

/Two cents.

 

[bs98r3kjf]

I don't think manipulation is necessarily wrong. It all depends on how you use it and what you're trying to achieve.

 

[invisible]

don't do it. it hurts people.

 

[Poetic Justice]

It's neither right or wrong, it just is.

Morality is subjective, and human nature cannot be quantified without bias. That said, it depends very much upon the circumstance and what the situation is calling for in question - without a context it is impossible to determine whether or not something is moral. However the criteria always remains biased and varies from situation to situation, therefore, any discussion involving objective levels of morality is futile.

/Two cents.

This ^

Without context this question can't be answered

Is it wrong to manipulate an old lady into giving you her life savings?

Is it wrong to manipulate your kids into going to school when they don't want to?

Is it wrong for a police man to manipulate a serial killer into confessing?

Is it wrong to indicate before turning a corner in your car so the car behind you slows down for you?

Context is everything in questions of right and wrong

 

[Trifoilum]

There's more: the reason this question even came up is because I have a friend who is so gifted at manipulation that at an unhealthy time in her life, she used it to her own gains and she used it so effectively that the people she did it to did not even realize she had played any part in their decisions.

How does she do it? O_O; sounds...quite awesome if I were to be honest.

As per its morality; I agreed with @DrShephard; and @Sonyab; in general regarding to motive and method, but then again, it's just a way to assert someone's viewpoint or wants. Asking a friend to stop using drugs? Manipulation. Telling your mother red is good for her skin? Manipulation. Not telling your friend her boyfriend sleeps with another? Manipulation. What we consider and put much value isn't manipulation by itself. 'Manipulating someone to take advantage of them' is the latter's fault. How about 'manipulating someone for their own good'?

Most often they don't rob others from their free will too. More likely, the manipulator affected the viewpoint of the manipulated, so that the manipulated, by their own choice, do what the manipulator want.

<ramble>
But, aside from personal motives.... and the value of 'to each their own' (that seems to be higher in American culture).... Why do some people consider manipulation by itself to be more treacherous, compared to other methods?

The first is honesty. Quite often manipulation is being grouped as another means of deception, of lying. From the above description it does sound like one. But this is not a simple case of black and white. Even the extreme opposite --I assume it to be assertiveness-- is basically the same thing. Is it better to say "You shouldn't do this" rather than "I heard that doing this can result in some bad things."? Also, one can be assertive and lying at the same time. But why the assumption about manipulation?

The reason, and the second part IMO is passiveness. Manipulation -- or any less direct method than 'saying what you want' is generally less active. Maybe this is related to the negative view of passive-aggressiveness; you want something, you should work hard for it. That kind of belief.

And another thing; what differs between manipulations and etiquette (or grace)? Isn't arranging our words to be less painful or crude is just that --manipulation of your words and vocabularies (if not content)?

Hell, even this post is another form of manipulation, if you think about it. Each of us are attempting to manipulate others to (hopefully) believe what we're saying, at the very least.
</ramble>

 

[Cyrus]

Very interesting points, everyone.

@ aeon, specifically, I thought someone one say something to that effect. I guess to define the concept I'm trying to define, I separate the connotations of unfairly and for their own gain from the rest of the definition... I don't know if we actually have a good English word to describe what I'm getting at, but the closest I can get to the idea I'm look for is the attempt to influence or control others.

I think we have established that the most people think that manipulation is morally wrong or right based on context and intent.

But the free will thing... Aeon thinks you can't ever rob someone of free will. Others have not so explicitly stated their views...

I think the manipulation my friend is referring to is a lot like the movie Inception: she would plant an idea in someone's mind without them knowing she planted it and she watched it grow and turn into action. That person never knew she planted the idea in the first place, and so they would go along thinking it was their idea all along.

Is that taking someone's free will? Is that "forcing" if you will, someone to act or believe as you want because you are the one who "corrupted" them? Corrupted may not be the right word because you may plant a very good idea... But if they don't know it was planted, they don't know that it didn't come from there own self...???

 

[Oranguh]

Manipulation, to my understanding, is most effective the more gracefully it is used..... But there are so many techniques. But manipulation isn't only reserved for deception either. I can be manipulative by being honest, all I have to do is make sure I state some truths at moments that are premeditated for certain desired results.

luckily.... It is often so that people with good intentions and understanding of other people excel best at manipulation. Usually people that are out for their own gains with bad intentions are not so good at the finer points of manipulation.

Aaanyways~ I don't really think it's something you can read a book about and put into practice..... Some people have a "sense" for manipulation and others... don't?

But I think we SHOULD write a book about it you know~ Just list all the instances where we recognize manipulation and then analyse them into a whole dictionary of skills :0 that would be so funny~ Oh yes and we have to like put a lock on it so that only a handful of trusted people would be allowed access to this forbidden dangerous power~ ooh sneaky~~

And now... finally a reason to use THIS monkey

 

[aeon]

@ aeon, specifically, I thought someone one say something to that effect. I guess to define the concept I'm trying to define, I separate the connotations of unfairly and for their own gain from the rest of the definition... I don't know if we actually have a good English word to describe what I'm getting at, but the closest I can get to the idea I'm look for is the attempt to influence or control others.

I think the manipulation my friend is referring to is a lot like the movie Inception: she would plant an idea in someone's mind without them knowing she planted it and she watched it grow and turn into action. That person never knew she planted the idea in the first place, and so they would go along thinking it was their idea all along.

I think that is an excellent example of the psychological process of suggestion, but I don’t think it is manipulation at all.

Is that taking someone's free will? Is that "forcing" if you will, someone to act or believe as you want because you are the one who "corrupted" them? Corrupted may not be the right word because you may plant a very good idea... But if they don't know it was planted, they don't know that it didn't come from there own self...???

I don’t think it is the taking of someone’s free will.

My sense is that each and every is free to express as they so choose, and others may choose to ignore or engage. A person may be suggestive, or even persuasive, but I don’t think that nullifies the recipient’s free will in any way. My sense is that all of us are responsible for the choices we make based on the stimuli we have experienced via our awareness.

Indeed, the nature of awareness in the human being is variable, and not at all consistent, as is our witness and recall of that awareness. To that end, my sense is that we all take things in from our environment, external and internal, and with those stimuli we do the best we are able in meeting our own needs. People may not bring a stimulus forth to the level of sensory, emotional, or cognitive awareness, but that stimulus may still produce an effect, even if the process by which it is assessed and ultimately stored or discarded is not a conscious activity.

The context of suggestion, free will, the filtering of external input, and the threshold of awareness can be examined in some detail through the use and study of hypnosis.

My sense is your friend is skilled in the power of suggestion, but that she does not engage in manipulation when doing so.


cheers,
Ian

 

[Naxx]

Let's say it's morally wrong of someone to take away another person's free will.

Wouldn't it be also wrong to take away that person's free will to be able to take the free will of others?

What is morality? Would it then depend on the person's own moral compass?


If she thought what she did was wrong from the deepest regions of her heart then it's probable she was wrong. If she really does not care, then no.

However if you're backhandedly asking if you should think she's an asshole then you need to weigh what you believe is right and what she means to you.