Thought Manipulation: The Use and Abuse of Psychological Trickery (26 page)

Our complex hidden calculations, according to Freud, are not random. They are driven from unconscious guiding principles. For example, the latent story is, in principle, always contradicting the known and expressed hypothesis. The unconscious voice is always opposing the conscious one, and such a strong opposition is able to maneuver a person to act against his declarations and conscious aspirations. However, we cannot avoid wondering if Freud actually discovered unconscious principles. Or did he construct sophisticated hypotheses according to therapeutic principles in order to help his patients to be released from their traps?

Freud’s sophisticated maneuver has a dramatic impact. His surprising and unexpected interpretation raises doubts in the dreamer’s view of her husband: “As regards the meaning of the dream and the dreamer’s attitude to it, we might point out much that is similarly surprising. She agreed to the interpretation indeed, but she was astonished at it. She was not aware that she assigned such a low value to her husband.”

The willingness of the dreamer to accept such sensational hypothesis opens for her new possibilities. She can examine her marriage from different perspectives and thence consider practical moves, such as getting a divorce, finding a lover, or improving her relationship with her husband. However, there is a possibility that Freud, the charismatic therapist, actually ruined her marriage without any substantial reason for doing so, aside from wanting to make a sophisticated interpretation of a simple and innocent dream.

MANIPULATION AND SKEPTICISM

The last example demonstrated that what appears as a meaningless dream can be spun and turned into a highly influential hypothesis. Freud used all his creativity to convince the dreamer that her dream enfolds a delicate and even intimate secret; her mixed satisfaction towards her marriage at a young age.

It is strange to imagine that a person is capable of not knowing consciously her true feelings about such a dominant issue in her life. This is indeed a sensational discovery. It is not surprising that Freud’s sophisticated maneuver has its impact and that the story ends with an astonished dreamer full of doubts about her husband and marriage.

However, if we want to be more accurate, the story does not tell how exactly the interaction between Freud and the dreamer ended. We do not have even the simplest clue whether Freud left the dreamer astonished, confused, and even frustrated, or how the interaction might have ended otherwise.

Freud brought this story “only” to demonstrate his technique to interpret dreams. However, it is not even clear whether Freud actually interpreted dreams or whether he developed a therapeutic technique to work with dreams. All the signs indicate that manipulative strategy is an entirely adequate explanation of Freud’s unexpectedly brilliant interpretation.

A manipulative strategy for therapeutic purposes intends to cast doubts in the dreamer’s mind on her perception of a central issue in her life. The important questions are: Is casting doubts in a person mind always beneficial? Is it always morally acceptable to steer a person into doubts about such a precious motif in her life?

BETWEEN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE SKEPTICISM

Entrenchment in a closed-minded and biased world view is not always surprising. Clearly, the fixated person finds some personal advantage in his strange position despite every costly disadvantage. His absurd position helps him to cope somehow with a problematic and even unbearable reality.

Ignacio Silone described the comfort that the miserable fascist finds in his unrealistic admiration to his leader: “If you attempt to criticize the Duce or discuss his character or behavior ‘objectively’ with a convinced Fascist you expose yourself to the same sort of difficulties as you would if you entered a church and said: ‘Can’t you see, my good woman, that the statue of St. Antony before which you are kneeling lacks even artistic value and is a worthless piece of papier-mâché?’ The good woman would scratch your eyes out. Criticizing the leader in the presence of a true Fascist is equivalent to attacking his greatest pride, the source from which he draws comfort and consolation to alleviate the difficulties of daily life.”

As Silone described, appealing to common sense in such difficult cases seems quite useless. In order to achieve an effective change, a subtle approach is required. Manipulation geared to plant doubts in the target’s mind on the value of his stubborn conception might succeed as an effective strategy. However, often enough, entrenchment in a closed and even erroneous world view obscures a painful truth. The possessed individual constructs a comforting delusion from pieces of harsh reality. In professional terms, the conviction serves as a defense mechanism.

Generally speaking, without defense mechanisms, even with their drawbacks, we would all exist in a perpetual nervous collapse. Might not dismantling and bypassing well-defended positions do more harm than good? Can raising doubts in the target’s precious biased position worsen his situation?

Casting doubts, especially in a manipulative manner, is a controversial matter fraught with difficult obstacles. On the one hand, doubting the worthiness of a position that seems to be the last resort before collapse might lead to complete despair and paralysis. On the other hand, doubting the value of a problematic perception could serve as a springboard for a change and better coping with many of the difficulties. Is there an efficient method to distinguish between destructive skepticism, doubts that might lead to despair, frustration, and even paralysis, and constructive skepticism, doubts that might yield a beneficial change?

These questions are not only particular to psychology. They have much relevancy to philosophers, social reformers, social scientist, educators, and every responsible human being. However, as important as this issue might sounds, we do not have any concrete method to distinguish, in advance, between constructive and destructive doubts. Therefore, reformulating the problem is required. I propose to replace the distinction between constructive and destructive doubts with the differentiation between active and passive skepticism.

“Passive skepticism” means to simply cast doubts in the target’s mind on the value of his world perception. This strategy could be constrictive, narrowing options and even destroying a last resort to cope somehow with helpless complicity. In contrast, “active skepticism” is a two-stage process. In the first, doubts are used to shift an entrenched position. The second is to offer practical options and possibilities to cope with a difficult situation. This strategy has better chances to help the target to discover practical alternatives in order to better cope with internal and external distresses. The difficulty is that any presentation of practical alternatives tends to diminish the effect of an irrational manipulative strategy. The strategy to market new ideas often needs to be the more sophisticated than the ideas themselves. This is where manipulation enters the picture.

NOTES

1. I learned about the idea that Freud never interpreted dreams from the course “Where is the Freudian unconscious?” delivered by Professor Menachem Peri of Tel-Aviv University. Peri’s central claim is that Freud never interpreted dreams but rather used the association of the dreamer to offer him a well-organized and constructed story.

2. Popper noted that Freud had presented paradigms that cannot be refuted. For a further discussion, see Chapter 7 note 13.

3. See Freud, Sigmund, Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, Translated and edited by Strachey James (New York & London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1977), 122.

4. Ibid.

5. Freud selects the haste motif, which is a central issue in his interpretation, from the dreamer’s free associations and two previous actual events: One week earlier, the dreamer bought tickets for the theater in advance. At show time, it turned out that one of the hall’s wings was almost empty. Therefore, her haste, which cost her extra money, was superfluous. In the second event, her sister-in-law hastens to spend all the money she got from her husband as a present, on jewelry.

6. Freud, Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, 220.

7. Ibid., 224–225.

8. See, for example, the example of the “sworn bachelor” in the previous chapter.

9. See Freud (Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, 125).

10. Ironically, Freud (Ibid., 124) noted: “We have only discovered that the dream expresses the low value assigned by her to her own husband and her regret at having married so early.” (The emphasis is mine.)

11. In a similar mode, it sounds strange to think that we can pose ourselves a riddle while we actually know the answer.

12. See Silone, I.,
The School for Dictators
(New York and London: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1938), 81.

13. I borrowed the distinction between constructive and destructive skepticism from Fisch, M.,
Rational Rabbis: Science and Talmudic Culture
(Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1997), 17 and 20–21. Professor Fisch’s discussion is dealing with criticism of the methodology of scientific research. Although the context is different, I find this illuminating distinction useful for my discussion.

14. Compare to Hayek’s view upon the task of the political philosopher: “The task of the political philosopher is different from that of the expert servant who carries out the will of the majority. Though he must not arrogate to himself the position of a “leader” who determines what people ought to think, it is his duty to show possibilities and consequences of common action, to offer comprehensive aims of policy as a whole which the majority have not yet thought of it. It is only after such a comprehensive picture of the possible results of different policies has been presented that democracy can decide what it wants.” Hayek, F. A.,
The Constitution of Liberty
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), 114.

CHAPTER 12

Conclusion

Manipulation is an elusive phenomenon present in almost every dimension of our social life. Manipulation appears in almost infinite variations and under many different guises. Manipulation ranges from immoral techniques of negotiation to acts of healing in psychotherapy and even medicine. Manipulation can serve as an effective weapon, as a future dictator’s propaganda, and it can be the last resort of the disadvantaged in society to attract attention to his misery. Manipulation can limit the target’s consideration and judgment while choosing his actions (limiting manipulations) and it can move a narrow-minded target to discover new horizons (expanding manipulations). In short, manipulation is an extensive phenomenon.

I have narrowed the discussion to manipulations that mentally interfere in the decision-making of a person. Thus, questions concerning the individual’s independence and freedom of choice arise throughout the book. Is the target of manipulation acting by free choice, or is the manipulator guiding him by abusing his weaknesses? Is the target purely a victim of manipulation, or does he allow himself to be manipulated? Where exactly is the line between free choice and being controlled against one’s inherent preferences, priorities, and desires?

We cannot measure a person’s “mental independence,” which creates the general problem of how to ensure the independence of any individual. How can we guarantee that an individual is acting freely and is able to improve his decision-making if he wants to?

As illustrated throughout, trying to cope directly with such questions would tax even the Wisdom of Solomon. Trying to solve problems that exceed human comprehension, especially in ethics and politics, can turn into a utopian mission that endangers our liberty, like in Orwell’s
1984: A Novel
. Therefore, some paradigm shift is required. Instead of concentrating on the problem of manipulation, let us take a step back to examine the bigger picture: how to build the foundations of a decent, stable society?

This broad and controversial matter diminishes the problem of manipulation because every suggestion to conduct a good society gives an indirect solution to the problem of manipulation. For example, capitalists will argue that the invisible hand, market forces in a free society, is the best available mechanism to protect our mental freedom. Constitutional economists will claim that a free society operating in a framework of an efficient constitution (general rules that are supposed to ensure a decent social game) can diminish the impact of damaging influences, such as indecent manipulations.

The debate over the decent social order is much more vital and critical than any the discussion on manipulation. Moreover, many liberal thinkers might argue that manipulative behavior is only a marginal problem as compared to all the other myriad difficulties that a free society confronts daily. However, whether manipulative behavior is a marginal problem or substantial, this phenomenon enables us to shed light into the dark corners of ethics and politics. Manipulation can serve as an instrument to explore major obstacles and difficulties that the open society must overcome.

This book is only a preliminary discussion on a pervading social phenomenon. This very basic discussion intends to prepare the ground for a much broader and important project: how to construct the foundations of a good society.

Bibliography

Adorno, T. W. (1951) ‘‘Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda’’ in The Essential Frankfurt School Reader. Ed. Andrew Arato and Eike Gebhardt. New York: Urizen, 1978, 118–37.

Agassi, J. (1985) Technology: Philosophical and Social Aspects. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

___. (1990) ‘‘Brainwashing,’’ Methodology and Science 23: 117–129.

___. (1996) ‘‘Deception: A View from the Rationalist Perspective’’ in The Mythomanias: The Nature of Deception and Self -deception. Ed. Michael S. Myslobodsky. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996: 23–50.

___. (2000) Liberal Nationalism for Israel: Towards an Israeli National Identity. Jerusalem and New York: Gefen (Translation from the Hebrew book of 1984).

Banks, Paul. ‘‘Store Wars,’’ Marketing Magazine 14 (8) 2003.