Obama's Nudging Experiment

[yepthatsme]

I read this article and it's a little disconcerting. Obama has put together a social and behavioral science team that is experimenting with changing peoples behavior or nudging it as they refer to it. Now, I know that this isn't anything really new, but to put together a team for experimenting on the public? This is reminiscent of mind control, government propaganda and controlling the masses.

Instead of running the government and concentrating on foreign affairs and addressing all of the problems that have been created by this administration and working for the good of the American people, they want to experiment with changing the behavior of the public. This is not good.


Obama?s effort to 'nudge' America

I just thought that some might find it interesting.

 

[Lucas156]

The government and other power players have been "nudging" the American public for decades. Look at the state were in now and you can see it clearly. We are a throwaway society. Why? Advertising. Consumerism etc. Television is basically one big brainwashing advertising machine. I'm not paranoid many experts agree with this.

 

[yepthatsme]

The government and other power players have been "nudging" the American public for decades. Look at the state were in now and you can see it clearly. We are a throwaway society. Why? Advertising. Consumerism etc. Television is basically one big brainwashing advertising machine. I'm not paranoid many experts agree with this.

I agree as well. We have seen this for years. As I said, this isn't new, but to create a team to experiment on the public? This is just a baby step. What would happen if this administration decided to really expand this team and the experimenting? The idea is troublesome to me.

 

[spencer rifle]

 

[Birds Away]

Nudging? It feels like a steamroller.

 

[jamil]

I read this article and it's a little disconcerting. Obama has put together a social and behavioral science team that is experimenting with changing peoples behavior or nudging it as they refer to it. Now, I know that this isn't anything really new, but to put together a team for experimenting on the public? This is reminiscent of mind control, government propaganda and controlling the masses.

Instead of running the government and concentrating on foreign affairs and addressing all of the problems that have been created by this administration and working for the good of the American people, they want to experiment with changing the behavior of the public. This is not good.


Obama?s effort to 'nudge' America

I just thought that some might find it interesting.

What the article describes isn't really like "mind control" experiments. It's understanding human nature. People generally make the most convenient choices. The receptionist at the dentist office asks me if I want to go ahead and schedule the next appointment. I always say yes. If I don't, I might not make it back to the dentist for a couple of years. If you make the the choice you want people to make, the most convenient choice, they'll usually choose that. And there's nothing wrong with doing that as long as you're not turning it into a political tool.

If politicians were to tweak policy such that it makes it easier to vote for Democrats than for Republicans, that is clearly inappropriate. But I don't see much wrong with what Obama is doing with this program. As long as it doesn't delve nudging political advantages or ideological behavior, I don't have a problem with it. Except I'm not too fond of the organ donor example. It assumes people have already decided. The default decision for something like that, in a free society, should be to opt in, not opt out.

Nudging? It feels like a steamroller.

Obama has moved the country farther left than any other president in my lifetime. He's done it more through rules for radicals than nudging. He's done it through ridicule, mob shaming, demonizing, lying, dividing. What should be considered immoral and far below the dignity of the office, has been embraced by democrats.

But that is different from what this article is about.

 

[SSGSAD]

Nudging? It feels like a steamroller.

YES, I think the same way .....

 

[yepthatsme]

What the article describes isn't really like "mind control" experiments. It's understanding human nature. People generally make the most convenient choices. The receptionist at the dentist office asks me if I want to go ahead and schedule the next appointment. I always say yes. If I don't, I might not make it back to the dentist for a couple of years. If you make the the choice you want people to make, the most convenient choice, they'll usually choose that. And there's nothing wrong with doing that as long as you're not turning it into a political tool.

If politicians were to tweak policy such that it makes it easier to vote for Democrats than for Republicans, that is clearly inappropriate. But I don't see much wrong with what Obama is doing with this program. As long as it doesn't delve nudging political advantages or ideological behavior, I don't have a problem with it. Except I'm not too fond of the organ donor example. It assumes people have already decided. The default decision for something like that, in a free society, should be to opt in, not opt out.



Obama has moved the country farther left than any other president in my lifetime. He's done it more through rules for radicals than nudging. He's done it through ridicule, mob shaming, demonizing, lying, dividing. What should be considered immoral and far below the dignity of the office, has been embraced by democrats.

But that is different from what this article is about.

Sorry Jamil, I have to disagree. I would have to say that creating situations to take advantage of human behavior goes hand in hand with the methods the president has been using to transform our government and our republic. He isn't stupid and he knows he can easily control those who don't think before they make choices by manipulating the choices available. This is an area that is not in his job description and will only be used for manipulation of the American people. Like I said before, this is just a baby step. There is no logical reason that our president would venture down this path unless he has manipulation in mind. It's a little disturbing.

 

[oldpink]

At any other time, talking about a president actually more or less openly trying to figure out a to implement mind control would have been the stuff of the tinfoil hatted crowd, but this particular president has shown repeatedly that there is nothing off limits.
Just take a look at the IRS for but one example of that.

 

[bulletsmith]

First mind control, second...

[video=youtube;9IKVj4l5GU4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IKVj4l5GU4[/video]

 

[jamil]

Sorry Jamil, I have to disagree. I would have to say that creating situations to take advantage of human behavior goes hand in hand with the methods the president has been using to transform our government and our republic. He isn't stupid and he knows he can easily control those who don't think before they make choices by manipulating the choices available. This is an area that is not in his job description and will only be used for manipulation of the American people. Like I said before, this is just a baby step. There is no logical reason that our president would venture down this path unless he has manipulation in mind. It's a little disturbing.

I'm not disagreeing that Obama has kept his promise to fundamentally change this country. He did. He not only moved the government more towards social democracy he also, with a lot of help from Saul, psychology, and the press, moved the nation's thinking more towards democratic socialism.

I'm just saying that designing a process to get a certain outcome isn't in itself "mind control", and by itself is not nefarious. Intent reveals the evil behind the tool. It's really not much different from ergonomics. Even ergonomics can be used with nefarious intents. For example, designing the self-destruct button such that it's the most ergonomic choice.

If the government uses an understanding of psychology to design tax forms such that the easiest way to fill them out produces the most accurate result, that's not nefarious. If they design a ballot to make a party or a candidate the easiest choice, that IS nefarious.

And I do doubt Obama's intent. He's demonstrated over and over that he will manipulate public opinion to get achieve his political goals. Healthcare. Gun control. Global warming. People go along with that **** for the same reason people buy snake oil.

 

[El-Cigarro]

Do you suppose people could be "Nudged" into doing ,well, Bad Things, to shape public opinion on a certain subject????

 

[Libertarian01]

The right and the military have done this just as much as the left.

Fox News changed the term "sniper" to "sharpshooter" in their news reporting in order to support the military in the Middle East. It was the same job but it took some of the sharpness out of the descriptor.

We don't "assassinate" enemy terrorists, we "drone strike" them. We don't kill "innocents" we have "collateral damage."

We don't "fight" crime, we have a "war" on drugs. They're not "criminals", they're drug "kingpins."

The words we use DO have meaning and evoke certain thoughts. By changing the words we change the social debate and the dynamic.

It also happened years ago. When was our last nuclear "accident?" We don't have "accidents" at nuclear power plants, we have an "event", kindof like a meetup or a cocktail party, but with potential fallout...

Regards,

Doug

 

[jamil]

Do you suppose people could be "Nudged" into doing ,well, Bad Things, to shape public opinion on a certain subject????

Conned? Yes. Nudged? Well, the really dumb ones, probably.

 

[ghuns]

We don't have "accidents" at nuclear power plants, we have an "event", kindof like a meetup or a cocktail party, but with potential fallout...

Yup. It ain't a party till somebody glows in the dark.

 

[Leo]

Find someone with a Phd in Predictive Psychology, and ask them what they are getting paid to do at their work. It is not just about figuring out what people want to see at public parks.

 

[jamil]

Find someone with a Phd in Predictive Psychology, and ask them what they are getting paid to do at their work. It is not just about figuring out what people want to see at public parks.

Don't most of them work in advertising and marketing to figure out how to get people to buy **** they don't really want?

 

[ghuns]

Don't most of them work in advertising and marketing to figure out how to get people to buy **** they don't really want?

Or PR firms who figure out how help politicians **** down voters' backs and convince them the other guys made it rain.

 

[jamil]

Or PR firms who figure out how help politicians **** down voters' backs and convince them the other guys made it rain.

So what we're saying, these guys slither among weeds? Maybe just a step from lawyers, eh.

 

[ghuns]

So what we're saying, these guys slither among weeds? Maybe just a step from lawyers, eh.

You don't think the NRA isn't employing the same dudes? Probably working for the same firms.