Talk:Manipulation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First try and stub for manipulation in a psychological context. Andries 21:37, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

== Maybe transwiki? == Or another Fryzxikls?

Never suggested this before, not too sure about it... but isn't this really a dictionary entry more than one for an encyclopedia?

I don't think so. Manipulation as a psychological fenomenon deserves much more attention. See the article in cs: wiki for inspiration. Egg 12:02, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Social psychology

Is manipulation good or a bad thing? Instinctively, and rightly so in this contributor's view, most people shirk at the idea of a manipulator 'messing around' with someone else's free will. Yet situations exist where the line isn't that easy to draw. For instance, assuming open persuasion isn't working, wouldn't a little manipulation be a good thing to prevent a youth from dabbling with drugs or roaming the neighbourhood with firearms?

This is an overt NPOV violation. Unless anyone disagrees, I'd like to take it out.--Serf 21:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Do they teach how to manipulate in MBA? Unsolicited 11:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Because it works fairly well, manipulation is a popular and widely-used relational tool - but regardless of the intent or motivation, manipulation is always a form of deceit and therefore dishonest. Opinion: There are many other less intrusive ways to achieve the desired result - say, straightforward conversation . . . 7 November 2006

[edit] Who?

"See Miranda Russo or Lori Hoffere."

What is the purpose of this line? Who are they? why are they here? where do they come from?why do they come here?what will it be? -Dawnshadow


Since a google search of both names reveals no particular connection to manipulation, I'm guessing that this is vandalism, perhaps by a jilted lover. The IP that inserted that line has produced content in the past but has been responsible for nothing but vandalism in recent weeks. Reverted. Miraculouschaos 14:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gun Control

Abusing Firearms?! Does this sound a little too preferential or what? POV

[edit] Text move

There is a debate concerning the use of manipulation. For example, in general it is disturbing to have one's free will tampered with, while on the other hand, it may be desirable to manipulate or intimidate youths into taking a course of action that is alternative to their current course of actions, such

[edit] Headline text

as abusing firearms or narcotics.

Who says it's possible to tamper with one's free will? (see mind control controversy)

And WHO sees it is desirable to get youth to change their behavior? Parents, educators, police?

And WHAT constitutes abuse of firearms or narcotics? Any use at all, even carrying a concealed pistol for self-defense? (see John Lott)

I agree that drug abuse is bad for you and society, but NPOV doesn't allow Wikipedia to endorse MY point of view on this. --Uncle Ed 15:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] There should be a seperate article on Manipulation

Manipulation - where person A behaves in a 'fictional' way to person B, often to influence person C's view of A or B. As illustrated in for example The Last Seduction. I have experienced manipulation myself when I was at a bad college, where a women in a relationship kept repeatedly flirting with me to, I think, try to make her boyfriend jealous and more interested in her. And a man who was habitually aggressive kept trying unsuccessfully to make me lose my temper so that he would seem to be an innocent victim to those in authority. Manipulation also means where A behaves in a 'fictional' way to B to make B do or not do things, as in a confidence trick or more mundanely. The article on Machiavelianism is more about a personality trait. Google found this webpage: http://www.coping.org/control/manipul.htm which gives detailed lists. 80.2.209.164 08:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert

I reverted the article to its shorter form. Much of the text that I removed was unreferenced, in an essay form, and perhaps original research. If I inadvertently removed encyclopaedic content then I apologise. --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)