Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by danparsonson 2017 days ago
> You are using politeness as a manipulative tactic to get your way.

That's a very cynical view and not what I'm talking about at all.

Yes, people manipulate other people using politeness sometimes. Being polite does not in general make a person manipulative.

> Regardless the outcome. If someone messes up your order you just say “Looks like we have the wrong order. We ordered X”

But... your example is a polite response, albeit impersonal. This is more or less what I would say. Do we have a different definition of politeness?

> I’m saying you don’t need to be polite as much as you need to not hurt people

I agree that trying not to hurt people is the right thing to do - but using the right language can be important in achieving that. Gentle language can reduce the pressure the other person is feeling if there is a problem to resolve. That's not manipulation, it's empathy.

You highlighted the phrase I used: "the latter is more effective at getting the best outcome, regardless of who is nominally at fault" - here I think we're just using language differently to each other. When I talk about getting the best outcome, I'm not talking about trying to trick someone into doing something for me. If I raise an objection, I have a specific outcome in mind - e.g. I would like my order to be fixed (and yes, this is a trivial example - in reality I would probably just eat what I'm given unless I don't like it, but in any case this is just a thought experiment). Having an outcome in mind and hoping for it to be a good outcome are not about manipulation; it's about understanding that some conversations involve transactions, and they can be concluded pleasantly and positively for all involved, or not. Manipulating someone in fact aims to achieve maximum benefit for one party at the expense of the other party, and even if it wears a "polite face" it is in fact the opposite of genuine politeness.

I feel like you and I probably actually agree but are just talking about slightly different thing. Otherwise I still don't understand what you're saying.