Abstract manipulation Bashny.Net

Talking about someone in general terms, we create the illusion of the interlocutor, supposedly we know this man. This technique is widely used by scammers, and it can often be found in the comic literature.

Curiously, the police too often resorted to this technique during interrogation. For example, in China in the fifties of the last century it was one of the most important methods of inquiry. Arrested reported only one thing: "We know everything, so you'd better confess»

.


Then the poor fellow was locked in a cell for a few days. Granted his own thoughts, he spent days and nights there, suffering guesses about what he is accused. In the end, he always found what to confess. If you dig a well, everyone can find for that condemn themselves. But questioning the man made it clear that although it is also a serious crime, but the police did not it mean.

Back into the chamber for another couple of days. The police are not particularly trying to think of something to get recognition method was primitive and brutal, but effective, if the person in that no matter what had to be condemned. At the end of the man he confessed that he was plotting a conspiracy against the government, or was about to betray his country or something else like that.

Admission use common phrases helps inspire confidence interlocutor. Speak out about somebody so that the other party was that to think out for yourself.

While you read this, squeeze the hand into a fist. Moved with compassion? Okay, now, hold for a few seconds. Just a couple of seconds. Start slowly, slowly, slowly unclench his hand. Do you feel it is a special feeling in my hand? Good.

To be honest, I actually have no idea what you are feeling right now. Maybe your arm aches or itches, or sweating. I'm just down the main information, limited general phrase "special feeling" that you are able to fill the gaps that you successfully did, being in full confidence that I clearly understand your feelings.

You never for a moment doubted that I just do not know it. Thus, you can easily make believe that they know everything about you, even the most intimate details, and you will not have time to look and how to tell it all. This reception are happy to use the religious leaders, the police and the crooks.

Other common phrases you've already realized that general phrases are fraught with danger. In general, try to guard against generalizations. Not combed one size fits all. Having said that all Germans are greedy, you, first, tell the truth, and secondly, nor offend thousands of innocent Germans who regularly make donations to the Red Cross and Greenpeace.

Beware of the word "all", "none", "always", "always", "never", "commonly", "immigrants", "youth" and so on. D. By saying "come in large numbers here all sorts", you combine completely different people in a faceless mass, and deprive them of the right to identity.

Of course, all of us often use generalizations in our daily lives, but the tabloids really abuse them. You have just read the headlines: "The people are protesting," "growing discontent", "Nobody knows." But what do they actually mean? Who is protesting? Clearly not all of the country's population. Dissatisfaction with what? It grows like?

If no one knows whence such information in the newspaper? Enough two letters disgruntled readers to entitle the article "Popular discontent" or "The People vs.". Or, "The results of the poll showed that ...." How many people were surveyed? Two? Two hundred? And what do they ask?

It may seem that I am exaggerating, but it is not. One journalist told me that earlier in his paper was a requirement: after only four letters disgruntled readers can talk about the people's discontent. I do not know whether it's true or not, but I think, today only one letter. Familiar editor once asked on what he bases his statement on popular discontent - it turned out that the ten letters that have come to the office.

"Well, what's the problem?" - You ask. Yes, that headline, journalists create the impression that the whole society is set up in a certain way, for example, dissatisfied with the policy of the government or the police inaction. Or on the contrary, that thousands of people have already made their choice and voted exactly for this party, and it would be foolish to stand out from the crowd.

Man in general tend to join the majority, and if all the people dissatisfied with the actions of the minister, then why should not I express my dissatisfaction? Tells us that the majority has already made his choice, newspapers or politicians can easily influence public opinion and to wrap the case in their favor.

Using the non-load bearing meaning of the phrase, a person may give the impression that he is experienced and well-informed in a certain area, in fact they are not. For example, a director of the company in a stressful situation, said: "First we have to discuss the new complex situation, which affects the important details of the ongoing process." Sounds something good, but that in the new situation? What was the same? Why it is so? What is the process and how it has been going on?

Having a lot of words, in fact, the director did not say anything. Journalists call this method a high level of abstraction, and their terrible annoying when the person starts to talk like that during an important interview. Instructors Communications advise their clients not to overuse this technique, using its maximum of three times, because then the journalists are losing patience, and the audience - all credibility

. The problem is that the listener is difficult to unravel the purpose of the one who uses this technique. It sounds so nice and it is very impressive, and should be strongly strain to notice the absurdity of such assertions.