persuasive communication

persuasive communication

Mr. A to allow Mr. B to make decisions that Mr. A thinks are good for him.

Mr. A: "If you buy this product, Mr. B's problem will be solved."

Sometimes Mr. A thinks it's "good for Mr. B" and sometimes he doesn't.

S1: Mr. A: "Buying this product will solve Mr. B's problem (and I really think it will)."

Mr. B's happiness is Mr. A's goal.

S2: Mr. A: "Buying this product will solve Mr. B's problem (and I don't think, but I think Mr. B will buy it if I say so)"

Sales are Mr. A's goal.

If it could be S2, then Mr. B needs to question Mr. A's statement.

Elderly people are forced to buy financial products at the behest of salespeople at brokerage firms.

If AI helps Mr. A by augmenting his power of persuasion, shouldn't it augment Mr. B's power of suspicion at an equivalent level?

Even when Mr. A has good intentions in S1, Mr. A's values may not match Mr. B's values.

I prefer X, so Mr. B must prefer X, too."

Mr. B says X isn't good; Y is better."

I think there is a high-productivity state that only occurs in relationships that are mutually beneficial and where the definition of "goodness" is aligned.

Even if it's mutually beneficial, it's unproductive when the definitions of goodness are at odds with each other.

A "people who are willing to stop the current project and use the resources for what they think is a better outcome" v.s. B "people who would prefer that the current project be completed successfully".

Mr. A suggests, "Maybe you should stop doing that and do this.

Mr. B. thinks, "There's no way I can stop."

---