
Why does advice work so poorly?
- 37
- 3
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
There are different types of advice, and some of the threads here bring up different criticisms of each thing, or ignore other things.
Tough Love advice is something I only give heavily caveated as "this worked for me". If it isn't something I've done I avoid giving this kind of advice to anyone outside of family and very close friends. For dieting this would be me suggesting that people cut out sugar or go low carb. It's worked for me, but it wasn't easy and it may not work for everyone (see the caveats).
Fun facts might already be known, or too broad to be useful. If someone I don't know asks for advice this is generally what I'll try to give them. For dieting this would be me mentioning that hard liquor and bacon generally don't have much sugar or carbs (unless it is added).
Winning advice becomes worthless when adopted too widely. I generally offer this advice not as a personal experience but as an example of someone else I know doing well at it. If you offer this as personal experience it just sounds like bragging. "Yeah I did much better at dating after I started working out and getting a good haircut" vs "My friend saw his dating prospects improve after he started working out and getting a nice haircut".
Warnings need to have clear consequences laid out. And people need to believe you about those consequences. "Ingesting a large amount of cyanide will painfully kill you" Otherwise warnings just sound like threats. Sometimes warnings are just threats. "Trespassers will be shot". Warnings where you personally suffered the consequences are better than the alternative "I drank a lot of soda and ate tons of sugary food and got diabetes by age 30"
Giving good advice
There does seem to be a lot of blame going around for people not taking advice. But giving good advice is a skill too. I see it as an important life skill, because I'd like my friends and those I care about to do better. When giving advice you should consider why you feel the need to give the advice. Unsolicited advice is rarely received well. Advice that is just meant to put down the receiver or build up the giver isn't much help, and possibly doesn't even deserve the label of "advice".
There are only three people in the world that I think should definitely listen to all of my advice, and those three people are my kids. If I'm not making a warning/threat about defending myself then my advice is mostly informational, you can take it and account for it in your actions but I see no reason for you to be obligated to follow it, or even believe it is correct.
There are some people that treat advice as a full on gift giving process. They expect accolades for giving the gift. They expect the receiver to at least pretend that they liked the gift. And the gift they'd always like in return is for the receiver to act on their advice. This seems like a toxic approach to me.
Giving good advice starts by making the person feel good about accepting it. If your advice sounds like a reproach, if the advice is framed in a way that makes the receiver feels stupid for not knowing before, it won't be accepted. Your "Fun Facts" and "Winning" categories are easier to give accepted advice in because they are not inherently negative. But if negativity cannot be avoided you need the insulate the reciever from it; such as you did in the "Tough Love" example, by saying it may not work for everyone, because if you didn't you'd be implying that they're lying if they percieved themselves as having tried it and the results didn't follow. If insulating the person doesn't work, or cannot work because the advice inherently implies that they've been deluding themselves, then you need to put yourself right there next to them taking on the implication, so that they don't feel it's their personal failing. So instead of saying "you think you're cutting out carbs but I've seen you eat tons of sweet desserts", go with "when I was trying to cut carbs, even when I thought I was doing it properly, I wasn't counting my desserts properly and turns out they amounted to more than I thought they did".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link