Latest / Think Twice Show / The Philosophy of Influence

Transcript

The Philosophy of Influence · Think Twice Show

0:01
We've all seen Mean Girls, and if you haven't, you're a spoiler
0:04
alert. A New Girl joins the school, is
0:07
pulled into the most popular group and slowly becomes just
0:10
like the bullies she used to hate.
0:12
She doesn't start off bad, she just learned their rules.
0:15
And that's the thing about groups, they shape you more than
0:18
you think. Bad people succeed.
0:21
Psychopaths and social paths are over represented at the top in
0:25
politics, in business, even in the workplace.
0:28
That shapes your life. One study found up to 4% of CE
0:32
OS meet the criteria for psychopathy.
0:34
That's four times higher than the general population.
0:37
Machiavellian traits of manipulation, charm, and
0:41
exploitation often help people climb faster than honesty or
0:45
kindness ever could. And when those people rise, they
0:49
don't just win, they lead. They shake the tone of the group
0:53
and set the rules of belonging. The confident, the charming and
0:57
the ruthless are the ones that others follow.
1:01
And if success depends on playing their game, what does
1:05
that say about us? Yo-yo yo.
1:18
Welcome to Think Twice. My name is Benz.
1:21
My name is Santa. And today we're discussing group
1:24
dynamics, social groups. So first question, do social
1:28
groups help you find your voice or do they mould it?
1:33
I think they do both. I think they do both.
1:35
No, no, no, no, no, no. No.
1:37
Stop, Stop, stop, stop. I know what you're going to say.
1:39
What am I going to say? It's a copper A.
1:42
Little bit, yeah. Yeah, I know my audience.
1:47
But but I think in 2025, just the way our society has gone,
1:54
and there's a number, number of reasons I'll I'll discuss.
1:57
I think it's more that social groups mould people's voices.
2:00
But ideally your voice would both be found and moulded at the
2:07
same time if you live in community with other people.
2:09
But like I said, I think the reality of 2025 is that people
2:12
are moulded more than they find their voices.
2:15
What do you think? I think they help find your
2:18
voice. Yeah.
2:19
Yeah. So like I looked at studies and
2:21
studies show that identity formation is heavily influenced
2:23
by peer groups, right. 80% of people's major life choices are
2:28
based on group influence. And social identity theory shows
2:34
that the group that you belong to helps form yourself concept
2:38
more than we actually realise. Yes, but people don't fall into
2:42
social groups accidentally. They self select them.
2:44
People choose the groups that they tend to spend most of their
2:48
time with. There's something called
2:50
homophily. Have you ever heard of
2:52
homophily? It's sort of very wealth
2:54
research area in sociology that people tend to choose people who
2:58
have who are similar to them. And sometimes it's done by
3:02
choice and sometimes it's forced upon them.
3:05
So like, for example, if you're in school and you're in year 9,
3:08
you're probably going to find people the same age as you,
3:11
right? But even if you are in a group
3:15
with different ages, like people that are 13 generally find
3:18
people who are 13 and 14 and people that are 17 and 18
3:21
generally find people that are 17 and 18.
3:23
So you generally find people that are around that sort of
3:27
area and age to you. And even if you look at
3:30
demographics and you look at London, let's take London for
3:32
example, and where are the majority of Nigerians in like
3:36
Peckham or exactly Woolwich or where are the majority of
3:40
Caribbeans? They're in Brixton, Halsden.
3:43
Where are the Turkish? They're in Enfield.
3:45
Yeah. Where are the South Asians?
3:47
They're in Southall in. Do you get what I mean?
3:49
And, and where are the Arabs? They're in Edgware Road.
3:53
Do you know what I mean? So like people generally go to a
3:56
particular area and and those groups help you then find your
4:01
voice. But I took a slightly
4:04
philosophical turn on that because that that was the data
4:07
and the psychology around that. When I took like a philosophical
4:10
turn, I looked at like Carl Jung and he had something called the
4:14
individuation, basically. And he was Freud's protege.
4:18
And he's probably the main reason why we understand or why
4:21
people call themselves introverts or extroverts.
4:23
Like he's quite important. And he had the idea, which I
4:29
agree with, that you find your voice, you find yourself through
4:37
self-awareness, conflict and experiences.
4:42
And through those three things, you, you then understand what
4:46
you're saying you under, you then understand who you are.
4:48
And it's constant. It's like constant development.
4:51
And when I put all of that together, I'm like, surely has
4:56
to be that those groups help you find that voice.
4:59
They like those experiences, those bits of conflict help you
5:03
find your voice. They don't actually mould it
5:05
because you pick that group to begin with.
5:06
I agree. I agree.
5:07
I think I. Think I made a compelling case.
5:09
You know, you made a very compelling.
5:10
Case. What I would say, though, is
5:13
that a lot of your examples were around early life, right?
5:18
And I think early life is extremely important in defining
5:21
who you are as a person and what your voice is going to be in in
5:25
adulthood. But I guess I want to make the
5:27
argument that in 2025, a young adult who is just entering the
5:32
world of work, you know, recent grad, they don't actually really
5:36
have that much time or energy to find their own voice, even
5:41
within the context of their own social group.
5:44
I think a lot of people are time poor and they're energy poor.
5:48
And what that does is it allows people to be susceptible to be
5:52
told what to think, right? And I think the combination of
5:57
not having a lot of time and energy as a young adult, and
6:00
also you're flooded with opinions on social media, the
6:03
combination of those two things, I think they basically tell
6:06
people how to feel about certain issues.
6:09
And instead of finding their own voice, they are moulded by the
6:12
membership of the group that they're in.
6:14
So, So what? But people pick the groups do
6:17
you think they pick? So are you arguing sort of they
6:19
pick these groups based on not so much their voice, but maybe
6:23
on like other similarities rather than like opinions?
6:28
Well, yeah, yeah, I mean, that's a good, good question that I
6:31
think as much as we try to pick groups, we're kind of pushed
6:35
into groups, right? If if I'm a a black man, I'm
6:39
going to be pushed even from a young age, I'm going to be
6:42
pushed towards the boys, number one, right.
6:45
Boys and girls are kind of like given separate experiences
6:49
through school and by virtue of being black, I'm going to
6:53
congregate for a number of reasons towards black people.
6:55
So I'm going to be part of the young black boys group whether I
7:00
want to or not, right? I don't choose to be a young
7:04
black boy and I don't choose to be in young black boys spaces.
7:07
But you you chose that group though.
7:09
I didn't choose that group by virtue of being who I am.
7:12
Society has told me, yeah, you're you're this.
7:15
OK, black. OK, let me let me be clear.
7:17
So you're essentially saying that because of who you are, you
7:21
have to choose that group. You didn't really.
7:23
You didn't really have that much autonomy.
7:25
Over that choice, I think, I think my choices were I did have
7:28
choices, right? And part of those choices are
7:32
about like who I ended up being as a person.
7:35
I will congregate to certain other people, you know, who will
7:37
make friends. But I'm saying my choices were
7:40
limited by society, society. Society is saying you can't go
7:43
pick up the Barbies and like, you know, learn how to like do
7:46
hair or something because that's not your thing.
7:49
So that choice is completely closed off from me from a young
7:52
age. You can't tell me I chose not to
7:54
do that. I didn't.
7:56
I was moulded to not do that. Does that make sense?
7:59
It's quite an interesting my choice was taken from me in that
8:01
in. That so, so you're essentially
8:03
saying like your environment was shaped in which you only have
8:07
limited amount of choices anyway to make that decision?
8:09
Yeah, and and by the way, I'm very happy with the way.
8:11
My do you know what? I mean, I'm good, but you know,
8:16
for other people aren't good. Other people are like they, they
8:19
didn't want to do those things that were cut off from them.
8:21
And it could be in in like intellectual endeavours.
8:24
You're told that, OK, you're good at sports, go hit the
8:27
field, G like stop doing all that other stuff.
8:30
Go do track and field because you're good at that and you're
8:33
pigeonholed in a certain respect from from a young age is, is
8:36
what I'm saying. But that's, I guess 1 aspect of
8:39
the question, right? Whether you get to pick your
8:43
social group or not. I guess what I want you to try
8:46
and engage with is this idea that people, young adults as of
8:52
right now, don't really actually pick what their voice is.
8:55
They're kind of told what to think.
8:57
How do you feel about that? Do you feel like that reflects
9:00
the reality that you live? Yeah, I do, simply because I
9:03
think, well, it's not even. I think data shows the majority
9:08
of people are followers. And by by that admission, you're
9:17
undoubtedly going to learn your voice from other people.
9:20
You know what I mean? Yeah.
9:23
So like, undoubtedly people's voices and people's opinions
9:26
aren't truly their own. Yeah, they haven't.
9:30
They haven't critically analysed their opinion often enough to
9:33
develop it. Yeah, there's a guy called
9:35
Stuart Hall. He's a sociologist, historian,
9:39
author. He, we wrote this paper in 1973
9:44
called Encoding and Decoding in Television Discourse.
9:48
And what I think I've actually mentioned this paper before when
9:51
we're talking about black British culture, what he argues
9:55
is that especially in the realm of media, right, People who
9:59
create media have a, a macro narrative that they're trying to
10:04
tell you, right? When we watch ATV show, there's
10:07
something that the person who produced or wrote that show is
10:09
trying to say. And whether or not you accept
10:13
what they're trying to say is, is, is different.
10:16
And it's sort of dictated by whether you recognise the codes
10:22
that were used in the creation of that that media, right?
10:25
And, you know, Straw Hall probably wasn't alive to see the
10:29
rise of social media, but but what he would say if he saw
10:33
social media is that the production of this media is just
10:36
now in the hands of the people, right?
10:38
The people can generate their own meaning, encode that meaning
10:42
within the media that they put out.
10:44
And then it's up to us as subjects to decode that, right.
10:47
And he has this framework of, of, of what happens when the
10:50
subject receives, receives the media.
10:53
Either you completely accept the meaning that is encoded, you
10:57
understand the codes that were put into the production.
11:00
That were intentionally put in there.
11:01
And you just fully just take it, take it on board or you
11:04
negotiate the meaning. You're like, I agree with some
11:07
parts of this, but I don't agree with other parts.
11:10
And that might be because you you don't fully accept the
11:14
coding, right? The the framing of the narrative
11:17
that you've been given, or you're in complete opposition to
11:20
that, to that meaning. And I think that's that's what
11:23
he called oppositional decoding, right?
11:26
And a good way of looking at this is like when the news talk
11:31
about protest. Yeah, certain news outlets will
11:34
portray protest as being violent and the police having basically
11:40
restored law and order in that protest.
11:42
People who understand the that language of, of the news media,
11:46
they'll be like, yeah, cool, the police did the right thing.
11:48
They, those people violent, they're in the bad, they're the
11:51
bad guys. Police are the good guys.
11:54
Other people, I think the majority of say, the British
11:56
public might negotiate that, meaning they might be like the
12:00
police kind of did the right thing, but.
12:03
You think the majority? I I think the the majority of
12:05
the British public are like in this middle space are like what
12:09
are you giving? I think 1 giving British.
12:11
People a lot of credit there I. Thought you said that yesterday.
12:13
We were talking. No, yesterday, yeah.
12:15
You remember we were talking at the party.
12:18
You were like the you you think a lot of the British public is
12:20
in that middle range of like being apolitical and can be are
12:25
suggestible like they could be. Swayed, yeah, I I would say
12:28
that, but I don't think they then negotiate the code.
12:32
Right, they don't There's. Actually, yeah, exactly.
12:35
They don't battle with them exactly.
12:36
They don't, really. Yeah.
12:38
They're sort of apathetic to it in a sense.
12:40
Yeah, that's, that's, that's completely fair.
12:42
And then there's, you know, the oppositional meaning is like,
12:45
fuck that the police are oppressing and suppressing
12:48
freedom of speech of the people and the right to protest.
12:52
And the protesters are in the moral right and have been
12:54
suppressed by by the police. And I guess what that's true of
12:58
Hall's theory. What I'm trying to say is that
13:00
in 2025, in the social media age, what we have is I can go on
13:06
TikTok right now and the next 10 Tik Toks I watch are of people
13:10
who talk my code. Yeah.
13:11
Do you get what I'm saying? They are people who I understand
13:15
and I am. I've been showing them because
13:18
I'm suggestible to those kinds of people speaking in that kind
13:21
of way. And I think there's a lot of
13:24
good that comes from that, right?
13:25
You get to jump in the comments, you get to negotiate meaning in
13:29
the comments. You get to see other people
13:30
negotiate meaning in the comments, and even your comments
13:33
can create a feedback loop where the person who's going to encode
13:37
their next video with meaning has seen your comment, and it
13:41
might actually, you know, change the next video slightly.
13:45
So we take your codes and we talk about that oppositional
13:48
code. Is that what you call?
13:49
Oppositional decoding, yeah. Oppositional decoding.
13:52
So if we take oppositional decoding and we then go on
13:56
TikTok, when you when you then are faced with these sort of
14:01
echo chambers, you're then decoding this as well, aren't
14:05
you? But you but you chose this lane
14:08
in the 1st place. That's why I'm like, they hope
14:10
you find it while you're sort of decoding this message at the
14:15
same. Time, Yes, yes, I guess what I
14:18
think is happening on social media is on some level you've
14:21
you've chosen the lane, you've chosen the echo chamber to go
14:24
into. But what what is happening to
14:27
you as a subject is that you are, you are decoding stuff in
14:32
an oppositional and negotiated way less and less because you,
14:36
you're being seen you. Trust the message and you trust
14:39
the messenger. Yeah, and what's what and
14:41
because that's the main way we in a sense negotiate culture is
14:45
now on TikTok and less in like person, right?
14:49
You don't really like, you know, we've got the luxury of being
14:53
able. I can come over to your house,
14:54
we can talk. I've got great friendships.
14:56
I can debate with my friends, my partner, my sibling.
15:00
But I think young people growing up don't necessarily have the
15:03
space and the opportunity to negotiate meaning.
15:08
And when that's happening online and you're being shown meaning
15:11
that is adjustable to you, you're, you're almost out of
15:14
practise of like negotiating meaning and finding opposition
15:18
to meaning. So you're just a suggestible.
15:19
Person, to conclude with what you're saying is basically like
15:24
it has to be mould because essentially to begin with your
15:29
options are limited. Yeah, for one.
15:31
So when you then choose it, you're then taking in
15:35
information that you've kind of chose and then you don't really
15:40
analyse that information that well, which helps you mould your
15:43
voice even more. 100 percent, 100% because I I.
15:46
Think that's a fairpoint like. Our parents picked up the metro.
15:49
My dad, my dad's a bus driver. He'd bring the metro home every
15:52
day. My pops would pick up that metro
15:56
and at least he knows on some level that metro's going to do
15:59
the metro thing. You know what I mean?
16:00
The newspapers have their own agenda, and he's probably some
16:04
more suggestible to the metro than I would like him to be.
16:07
But he still finds negotiated meaning in that he doesn't
16:10
completely accept it. Whereas today I've got TikTok.
16:13
The Tik Toks are funny. The coding is all my language,
16:16
all my people, and I'm not, I have no inclination to negotiate
16:22
meaning with that, that TikTok. And I think that's just the
16:25
downside of the age we live in Fairpoint.
16:29
But you know, there's, I think there's a lot of benefit as
16:31
well. There's a lot of good things
16:32
there. OK, on the next question, yes,
16:40
is manipulation always wrong? Let's quickly define
16:47
manipulation before we go further.
16:49
So the the definition I've got here is manipulation is the act
16:52
of influencing or controlling someone's behaviour, thoughts or
16:56
emotions, often in a clever, unfair or.
16:59
Covert way, I think manipulation is, is always wrong, I swear.
17:05
Yeah, I think manipulation is always wrong.
17:08
I, I, I do think we influence each other a lot, like whether
17:11
we want to or not. And we'll get into like where
17:15
that becomes unethical potentially.
17:18
But I want to hear what you think.
17:19
Do you think manipulation is always wrong?
17:21
No, I, I, I don't, you know, I think I started where you were
17:25
and then I sort of looked into paternalism, like paternalism.
17:30
I'll explain it quickly. It's sort of like it comes from
17:32
the word father in, in Latin. And it's basically the idea that
17:36
you look after something for the interests of that person, for
17:40
the betterment of that person, whether they know it or they
17:43
don't. So like when you're looking
17:44
after children, for example. And when I looked at
17:47
paternalism, paternalism is basically manipulation.
17:51
And I thought, OK, like if you manipulate the environment,
17:55
similar to like what you were saying in the first book, if I
17:57
manipulate the environment, I don't think that's that wrong.
18:01
Like if you are an alcoholic, I'm not trying to take you tape.
18:05
Do you feel me Like I'm not, We're not going central like
18:08
that. If you're an.
18:09
Alcoholic clan we're not. You know, we're not going to
18:13
suck. And like if if you're an addict
18:18
in any sort of sense, like I'm not going to do that thing
18:21
around you. And that's sort of manipulating
18:24
the the environment. So in that sense, I can't see
18:27
how that would be wrong if you know what.
18:29
I mean fair, fair. And I guess within that
18:31
definition, the act of controlling someone, often in a
18:33
clever, unfair, covert way. You're saying when it's not in a
18:37
unfair, covert way, it can be ethical?
18:40
Well. I, I think the, the main point I
18:43
found with manipulation is the autonomy.
18:48
So like if individuals still have autonomy, I think it's
18:51
fine. OK.
18:52
So even though you limit their choices even which might be
18:57
unfair like I guess in some sort of way and it is definitely
18:59
covert. Like I have thought about it and
19:01
it is strategic. I think that's fine as long as
19:04
they still have autonomy of choice.
19:07
Autonomy is difficult to choose. Autonomy, freedom, like these
19:11
things are quite difficult to quantify though, because it's
19:13
not like you've got 100 of autonomy and then someone takes
19:17
away 10 and you still have 90 autonomy.
19:20
It's not quite like that. A lot of people would say if you
19:23
restricted someone's autonomy, you have taken it away.
19:25
Do you get what? I mean, well, OK, maybe autonomy
19:27
is not the right word. Or even.
19:28
Freedom or whatever. The capacity to choose, you
19:31
still have the and you, you do feel like you have autonomy at
19:34
least that's like if you didn't know about something, you feel
19:37
like you have autonomy. You know what I mean?
19:39
Like and and and I can see why someone would.
19:41
Argue that is wrong, yeah. Don't get me wrong, like I I I
19:44
hear that but I'm arguing that it's not wrong basically.
19:47
Fair, I mean I. Think it already happens though,
19:50
in, in, in day-to-day life, like seatbelts, for example, Keir
19:54
Starmer and his ban on sugary drinks.
19:57
Like, you know, it, it already happens like, so I, I, I don't
20:00
think it's that wrong. If, if I'm honest, like I, yeah,
20:03
I don't, I don't think it's wrong.
20:04
I think it's for the betterment. And it's weird that you say that
20:06
because I know you like to often impose your thoughts on people.
20:09
It's like I was. I thought that's where you
20:12
might. Go with it.
20:13
Well, well, I think there's, there's definitely a
20:15
conversation to be had about consequentialism, right?
20:17
Because that's kind of what we're talking about is the
20:20
consequence of an action the, the, the benchmark by which you
20:25
should judge the morality of it, right.
20:28
And how does that come into the picture for you?
20:30
So they say you, you know, you're not going to take
20:33
alcoholic friend to Sir. Are you going to actively take
20:37
him somewhere that might help is alcoholism or is it just that
20:41
you wouldn't exacerbate the issue?
20:43
Would you try to change him like and take him rehab or something?
20:47
Well, that's that's, that's an interesting thing because
20:50
similar similar to what you were talking about in that first
20:52
question. Yeah.
20:53
In regards to algorithms, yeah, it's sort of like algorithms are
20:57
there to keep you on the app for the app to make money, right.
21:00
Yes. That's their aim.
21:01
What if the algorithms were actually like, really good?
21:04
What if they suggested content to make you a happier person, to
21:10
make you a more empathetic person, to make you a kinder
21:12
person. And that was the only content we
21:15
really saw what, what pushed out.
21:18
I'd argue that manipulation is good in that sense, right?
21:21
Because they already manipulate us, right.
21:23
So now if they manipulate us for better, I'd, I'd, I'd argue that
21:25
is for the better. So back to what you were saying,
21:28
like would you take them? I think the, the parallel was
21:31
very similar. Like if, if it's for good and
21:34
you still have the autonomy of choice because and when we're
21:36
scrolling on social media, we're thinking we still have choice to
21:39
scroll or to stop or to come off the app.
21:41
Like we, we still do feel like we have some sort of autonomy.
21:44
And that person or your friend in that situation would feel
21:47
like they had some autonomy. And if you took.
21:49
Him rehab. Well, to take someone to rehab
21:53
or take them to a place that encourages healthier living, for
21:58
example, Yeah, it's just, it's probably.
22:02
But like any situation where you still have the capacity to
22:04
choose, I think it's then OK. OK, OK.
22:08
So at what point would you say some he didn't have the the the
22:12
opportunity to choose? Obviously the extreme is
22:15
forcing. Someone to go to rehab?
22:17
OK. If you force someone to do that,
22:19
like in a manipulative way, like to say I lied to you about
22:23
something. You were like, oh, we're gonna
22:25
go, we're gonna go take like wake up early in the morning.
22:29
Like, like that. Yeah.
22:30
And then you're like, dragged in.
22:32
Yeah, that would be crazy. But yeah, that would be bad to
22:38
me. Like even if, even if the
22:40
outcome would still be the same, yes, that would still be wrong.
22:43
Yeah. It's interesting how you're you
22:44
basically are trying to balance the consequence with doing the
22:48
right thing by your friend. That's why I sort of landed on
22:52
the capacity to choose. Like, as long as you always have
22:56
the capacity to feel autonomous, you it can't.
23:01
It's it's not the wrong thing, particularly if the intention's
23:04
good. Yes, yes.
23:06
So for me, I had like 3 things that I was thinking about.
23:09
Intention is one of them or the one you just mentioned, some
23:12
expectation of harm. Like if I as a parent, you know,
23:16
force my kid to be a footballer, if I have some expectation that
23:20
the regime I'm about to put my kid through might harm him in
23:23
some way, I, I think it becomes unethical.
23:26
And then the third thing is like power, right?
23:28
Me and you sitting here as friends, as peers, you know, we
23:34
try to change each other's minds every week, right?
23:37
On some level, I'm trying to influence, influence you at a
23:40
minimum to accept my argument on certain questions on on a more
23:45
macro level, whether I like it or not, the things I say and the
23:49
way I say it might influence you and other people around me on a
23:53
deeper level, right? You might start to change your
23:55
mind about certain topics, especially the ones that you,
23:59
you know, you don't have a current opinion on, right?
24:01
But the thing about that is that we are peers.
24:03
We don't have a power dynamic or power imbalance.
24:06
Between, well, it's not manipulation because I
24:07
understand that's happening. Yes.
24:09
If I, if I like, didn't understand that was happening,
24:11
yeah, it'd probably be a bit wrong.
24:15
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, of course.
24:16
Yeah, it'd be, it'd be there'd be a power like imbalance, yeah.
24:19
And I think the the parent child dynamic is a good one to to
24:23
explore because everyone's had it, everyone's parents have
24:27
tried to mould them in a certain way.
24:29
But because there's a power dynamic there, I think it's like
24:32
fraught like it's this, the potential for harm is quite
24:34
high. But yeah, it'd be good to hear
24:36
what you think about that that. That situation of the parent.
24:38
I really didn't want to use the parent and child situation
24:42
because I always felt the child's brain isn't fully
24:45
developed, right. It's incumbent on the parent to
24:49
save this child from harm. Yes.
24:51
From they they can't make those decisions.
24:53
Yeah. Or should even if they can, they
24:55
shouldn't make those decisions. Yeah, because they don't
24:57
understand the consequences of the decisions that they're
25:00
making. So you have limited autonomy
25:05
anyway as a child. So if if my point is based on
25:11
autonomy, you don't have full autonomy as a child and you
25:14
shouldn't have full autonomy as a child anyway.
25:16
So that's why I kind of wanted to stay away from that.
25:19
But it. Sounds like it's like you're
25:20
saying your argument breaks down within the parent child dynamic,
25:25
so you're going to just stay away from the.
25:27
Parent child, that's not there's been thinking you were going to
25:33
try and understand my point and explain you see how in the first
25:36
segment I understood this point, tried to explain it for him.
25:39
Nobody should understand your point and you you just tried to
25:42
twist my drain. I was like trying to be all all
25:45
friendly and that and trying to work together, trying to like
25:48
help people understand me, trying to dig me.
25:51
That squeal that you did, Yeah, that's the squeal of a rat.
26:00
Good, No, but like if if we actually deep the parent child
26:04
thing. What So you're telling me like
26:06
if I'm if I'm like to my child, these vegetables taste really
26:11
nice or like you, you like dress up in a particular way for this
26:17
child to eat their vegetables. That's wrong because they're
26:21
manipulating them, right. So you're telling me that's
26:24
wrong? The The thing is, it's not like,
26:29
it's not like any one of those three things can make it
26:32
manipulation. It's just that like that's the
26:34
framework that like when I did my research, made the most sense
26:38
to consider all three together. Like if your intention and the
26:44
your intention is good and you don't think that there's any
26:47
reasonable risk of harm to the kids, like the vegetable thing,
26:52
then it's fine. Like you expect you expect the
26:56
the vegetables to be good for the kid, right?
26:59
So I wouldn't think that is if there's no risk of harm, Like
27:04
how can it be manipulation? How can it be bad?
27:07
OK, so there has. To be some risk of.
27:09
Harm. So there has to be harm for it
27:10
to be, there has to be some risk of harm for there to be some
27:13
level of manipulation. Absolutely, because the reason I
27:15
say risk of is that we don't know certain things.
27:18
Like again, again, like if I want to make my kid a
27:22
footballer, he could be a footballer, but he could also
27:25
have neglected other aspects of his life, correct?
27:29
And there's a risk there, right? We don't know which one it's
27:32
going to be, but the risk is the risk.
27:35
And any level of risk wrong. It's tough to say, but I think
27:39
if there's a reasonable risk, yeah, like the footballer thing,
27:42
like there's a high risk even. So what if, like the veggies for
27:44
example, there's a risk that they no longer trust you as a
27:48
parent when they realise that you've been lying to them for
27:50
their whole childhood? It's a bit extreme, but like
27:54
that sort of concept. It's actually funny.
27:55
Like my sister when we were kids, we didn't like spinach.
28:00
So. But Sarah did like she like was
28:04
like, fine, yeah, cool. And to get her on board, me and
28:08
Emmanuel and like and like stop the spinach on getting on the
28:11
plate. Me and Emmanuel convinced her
28:13
that if you eat spinach in cooked form is actually going to
28:17
turn into a snake in your belly. And all my life, like we had no
28:23
idea how good that worked. One day she just stopped eating
28:26
spinach and we didn't think anything of it.
28:29
It took to when she was like 20 she was like guys by the way,
28:32
for like 2 years of my life I genuinely thought spinach would
28:36
turn into a snake. Do you know what I mean?
28:39
And I was like, fuck, I didn't realise.
28:41
It worked that 1 but yeah, like I, I.
28:47
Don't know how she felt but it when when she said it she was.
28:50
Like, because, like that. It kind of rocked her, like it
28:53
wasn't it's. Kind of like then like every
28:54
kind of manipulation has some potential for harm.
28:59
Yes, that's what we're saying. So even that vegetable example,
29:03
for example, there is potential for harm.
29:05
Yeah, and, and The funny thing is the look on her face and the
29:09
way she said that that story was kind of like it rocked her faith
29:13
in us as a kid. Obviously we're talking like
29:16
6-7, eight years old here. But for a period after that, she
29:20
was like, Rob, my brothers are just gassing.
29:24
They're just, you know, spinning me up any, any which way.
29:28
OK. But but yeah, I think, I think,
29:32
you know, you would hope as a parent your kid would
29:36
understand. Yeah, of course of.
29:38
Course, of course, right. So I would say the risk is risk
29:41
is pretty low there, all right. On to the final segment, the
29:48
dilemma. You're on jury duty, and you're
29:52
the last one holding out on a unanimous decision.
29:55
It's been several days, everyone's exhausted, and you
29:58
just want it over. Do you keep pressing your doubt,
30:01
knowing you'll be resented? Or do you cave knowing the group
30:04
might be wrong? What would you do?
30:07
I think generally speaking, I'm going to hold strong.
30:12
Yes bro, we're on opposite sides this whole episode.
30:14
That's. Crazy.
30:15
I'm holding strong. However, it does depend on
30:19
whether I'm sending someone to gaol or not because I think I
30:23
would rather err on the side of not send them to Joe and I could
30:27
cave that way, but I wouldn't cave to send someone to Joe
30:30
because I don't believe in the gaol system.
30:32
You know what I mean? So, and that is a big thing I
30:35
won't be able to to get around. So if it's like if when I cave
30:40
the guy goes to gaol, I probably wouldn't cave.
30:44
Do you know what I mean? Yeah.
30:45
Yeah, that's crazy interesting because.
30:47
Would you just for it well. The way I was looking at this
30:50
was I've got the same information as these man, you
30:52
know, OK, but I've come to a different conclusion, right?
30:56
So like we've all got the same information.
30:57
I've come to a different conclusion.
30:58
These men are so strong. There's 10 people that believe
31:02
this is the this is the outcome. And I'm the one person I'm like,
31:07
well, I guess I just might be wrong.
31:09
You get what I mean? That's that's basically where my
31:12
head got to with it. It was like, well, I guess I
31:13
just might have made a mistake. Like I've held out and like my
31:17
conscience will be clear because this is what I thought was right
31:20
and I held out for a super long time on it.
31:23
My conscience is clear. I fought that corner, but I
31:26
might, I might just be wrong. Isn't it like so?
31:29
That's probably why I would cave if I'm honest with you.
31:31
Does it does it matter what your peers think about you or is it
31:36
are you tied to the case? Can you like remove yourself
31:39
from, you know, the group dynamics and people like
31:42
despising you and like thinking of you in a certain way?
31:46
Or is it just that you doubt your decision?
31:48
I doubt myself OK, just because it let's think about that like
31:52
real like if you really, really deep it and you're like rather
31:55
like I've received exactly the same information as people.
31:59
Yes, I've come to a different conclusion.
32:02
We've been sitting here for ages.
32:04
They're steadfast in their opinion.
32:08
I might just have this one wrong do.
32:11
You know what? So I watched.
32:13
It's called The Jury. Yeah.
32:15
On Channel 4, it's ATV show where they take historical cases
32:19
that were contentious at the time and they recreate them with
32:23
two live juries in in in a like mock up courtroom.
32:28
Everyone knows that the people actors like everyone understands
32:32
that it's a recreation. But obviously the ceremony of
32:36
the jury really plays on the juror's mind.
32:39
Like they genuinely feel emotionally tied to the case and
32:43
they feel as if they genuinely need to come to the correct
32:47
decision. On one of the seasons there's a
32:50
guy who is adamant the in in the case that the woman was guilty,
32:59
right? He wants to convict her of
33:02
murder. And the defence's case is that
33:05
it was self defence on the woman's part.
33:07
And at the start of the case they take everyone's vote.
33:10
They're like, do you think it's murder or not?
33:12
And it's like 3 people think it's murder.
33:14
About eight people, I think, or nine people out of a twelve
33:17
person jury are like, it's not murder.
33:20
This guy goes deadpan to the camera on like episode 2.
33:24
He's like, I will not rest until I change the mind of all of
33:29
those nine people each. It is my duty.
33:32
I have to change their mind. And then for the next like 3-4
33:36
episodes, he just goes on a on a, on a campaign of manipulation
33:40
to in my eyes, right. And he he literally goes around
33:43
he and he twists the jury's opinion and he gets a couple
33:47
people on board. He's got like his little, you
33:48
know, he's got a right hand man and stuff and that group and
33:51
then he goes that group, that group goes out and like just
33:56
gets people. And there's one woman that's
33:58
holding out right at the end. And it's literally this exact
34:03
scenario that we're talking about, the moral dilemma.
34:05
And she's so adamant that the woman was acting in self
34:09
defence. And right at the death, she just
34:11
caves and the guy comes out of the room where they decide to to
34:16
unanimously vote murder. He comes out of the room and he
34:19
goes, yes, like that. And I'm like broski.
34:23
You've lost sight of what it's actually what what you're there
34:26
for isn't. It do you know what I mean?
34:28
So I, I think in, in that scenario as much as 11 people or
34:33
10 people have said what you doing like they've come to a
34:37
different decision to you. How did they arrive at their
34:40
decision? Yeah, that's tough to say that
34:44
that's fair. That's fair.
34:44
Yeah. And and when when the when the
34:47
because there's two because. They might have not.
34:49
They might essentially they wouldn't have taken the same
34:52
process of thought that you have to get to where you're at.
34:55
And that's probably the part that I was missing.
34:57
Really. Yes.
34:58
You're, you're basically giving people too much credit, like.
35:01
Correct. Yeah.
35:02
Yeah, and they might have just been influenced one way,
35:05
manipulated 1 manipulated one way and they just don't see the
35:09
your path like the way that you've arrived at that and on
35:12
time a level like you, you might not be able to see theirs.
35:14
And that's that's completely fair.
35:16
And you need to find a way to understand each other.
35:18
But that TV show was crazy because she's come out the the
35:23
actual there's two juries both judging the case at the same
35:26
time, but they don't know that they the other one exists.
35:29
So she's just caved at the last minute.
35:33
She's already like, emotional that the fact that she's caved,
35:36
she's come in and then heard that the other people didn't
35:39
convict her of murder. And she's obviously broken down
35:42
into distraught, distraught because she's realised like, oh,
35:46
number one, I flopped. But #2 like I was not strong
35:51
enough of will to withstand the group and the group just.
35:55
Yeah, mine's a matter of will. It's like.
35:57
Matter of like information. Yeah, it was I always think like
36:02
I've always held like the idea or contact this slightly off.
36:04
We're going to lock up to church soon.
36:05
But I've I've always had this sort of idea that if you're
36:11
intelligent, you should always doubt your results.
36:14
You get what I mean? Like, so even if you come to a
36:17
conclusion, you should doubt it a little bit and then try and
36:21
like continually try and improve it, right.
36:23
Like your, your, your conclusion.
36:25
So if there are 10 people, the vast majority are saying
36:28
something and you're like, that doubt probably in my head is
36:32
that maybe I was just wrong on this one, that.
36:34
Yeah. I actually, I actually 100% hear
36:36
that, 100% hear that. And I would definitely doubt
36:39
myself if I couldn't see how they arrived there because if I
36:42
can't even understand how they got there, that means I'm
36:45
there's some information. Yeah, I miss my.
36:47
Working. I miss my working.
36:48
You know what? I mean, I've missed.
36:49
Something I think carried the two.
36:53
You know, so I definitely reconsider if that was the case,
36:57
but if I could see how they got there, and I also then disagree.
37:00
I have to hold fast, I think. All right.
37:02
Much love, see you soon.