Compelling: mockery versus logic

Post Reply New Topic

When reading something, which do you think is able to persuade you more? Analyzing the logic of what that person says or their ability to intentionally make you laugh?

Which do you think ought to persuade you? Which in actuality does persuade you?

There is no choice. Input goes that way:

1) Pre-conscious (you read without really paying attention)
2) Immediate attention shift (you read something important)
3) Emotion appraisal (you label the emotion of what you read)
4) Cognitive reappraisal (you analyze and eventually ignore the emotion)
5) Meta-cognitive process (you think how you came to think about what you read)

Emotion is always prime, you can just persuade you out of the emotion. Emotions are irrational, I systematically question them.

Interesting algorithm, however what if I don't read without paying attention, but instead actively read everything?

Also, is emotion always irrational?

Of course you can focus your attention more, but you will just stay at the point 2) of the process. It's that way for any input that enter the brain through any of the senses.

Emotion is mostly irrational and it's normal, rational in a sense Fear often happens even there is no danger, it's like a very sensitive alarm system that can't let any risk go through because one risk can be deadly. Fear has a purpose and it's the speed, because the body that cannot afford the time of a rational computation when there is a danger. (Of course each of the 5 steps in the cognitive process can be trained, so fear is relative to anybody experience)

Dan Ariely has an excellent blog on behavioral economics (or how emotions are irrational in the context of economical decision) It's fun and incredibly insightful.
http://danariely.com/

There is one of his video on Fora that summarize one of his book with very good anecdotes:
http://fora.tv/2010/06/07/Dan_Ariely_Th ... ationality

Logic should be the persuasive factor, but sometimes laughter and mockery wins out.

ruveyn