The Perils of Novel Argument

Influencing others using any means other than reasoning from the merits of the issue at hand can lead organizations away from their own objectives. That's why knowing how to recognize how people use cognitive biases to influence others is a valuable skill. When we notice such attempts, we're better able to limit the effects of manipulation. With this in mind, let's explore a technique of influence that derives its power from cognitive biases. That technique is the use of novel, sophisticated, or subtle argument.

I'll use the name Aristotle for the Advocate, and Carneades for the Skeptic. Aristotle is trying to persuade Carneades of something; Carneades is dubious. Let's say that Aristotle's argument is difficult to grasp, sophisticated, and wrapped in subtlety, but it's solid nevertheless. As Carneades listens and engages, he has a learning experience. He finds himself in the student role under Aristotle's tutelage. When he finally understands Aristotle's point, he has a sense of intellectual achievement: "Ah! I get it."

Several cognitive biases can help Aristotle as he persuades Carneades. Let's consider three.

Confirmation Bias

Confirmation Bias is our tendency to emphasize and remember information that confirms our preconceptions. Carneades, like most of us would, has a preconception — he believes that he is highly capable intellectually. After he finally understands what Aristotle is saying, he has an incentive to accept the argument, to be persuaded. His success in understanding Aristotle's difficult-to-grasp argument confirms Carneades in his belief in his own intellectual prowess.

The Focusing Illusion

The Focusing Illusion is Some attempts to influence others
succeed not on the basis of
the merits of the argument, but
because they manipulate peoplethe tendency to overvalue one aspect of a situation relative to its importance. Thus, if Carneades invests significant effort in grasping Aristotle's argument, and if he succeeds, he will have an incentive to place more emphasis on that evidence than might otherwise be appropriate. In effect, he tends to want to justify the effort invested in grasping Aristotle's claims, by overvaluing their importance. The difficulty of grasping the novel or subtle argument can thus enhance the Focusing Illusion.

The Halo Effect

The Halo Effect, generalized a bit, is the tendency for our assessment of one attribute of a person, situation, or thing, to influence our assessment of the item's other attributes. Thus, an unusually attractive person is often judged as unusually trustworthy; an unusually well designed Web site is assessed as unusually credible. With regard to the novel argument Aristotle presents, his role as "tutor" tends to cause Carneades to admire Aristotle's intellectual powers. This leads Carneades to evaluate Aristotle's argument as more plausible than the argument itself might otherwise justify, because the "halo" of Aristotle's sophisticated argument bestows credibility on Aristotle, which, in turn, makes the argument more credible.

These effects are admittedly subtle, and — to some — novel. Take care not to let their subtlety or novelty affect your assessment of their validity.  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Devious Political Tactics:

Active Deceptions at Work

Among the vast family of workplace deceptions, those that involve presenting fiction as reality are among the most exasperating, because we sometimes feel fooled or gullible. Lies are the simplest example of this type, but there are others, and some are fiendishly clever.

Suppressing Dissent: II

Disagreeing with the majority in a meeting, or in some cases, merely disagreeing with the Leader, can lead to isolation and other personal difficulties. Here is Part II of a set of tactics used by Leaders who choose not to tolerate differences of opinion, emphasizing the meeting context.

Behavioral Indicators of Political Risk

Avoiding dangerous political interactions is easier if you know what to look for. Among the indicators of possible trouble are the behaviors of the people around you.

Preventing Meeting Hijacking

Meeting leads, meeting Chairs, and facilitators must be prepared to deal with meeting hijackers. Hesitation, or any ineffectual action, enhances the hijacker's chances of success. Here are suggestions for preventing hijacking.

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: VI

Narcissistic behavior at work distorts decisions, disrupts relationships, and generates toxic conflict. These consequences limit the ability of the organization to achieve its goals. In this part of our series we examine the effects of exploiting others for personal ends.

See also Devious Political Tactics and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings

Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.

And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I

Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyEnqRnfuMASvKyajner@ChacNtlskcBmaRsIpTFWoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.