Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses
-
Upload
louis-de-saussure -
Category
Technology
-
view
1.570 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses
![Page 1: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Manipulation, discourse Manipulation, discourse analysis and cognitive analysis and cognitive
science: methodological science: methodological perspectivesperspectives
Louis de SaussureUniversity of GenevaAscona, sept. 2002
![Page 2: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Manipulation: issuesManipulation: issues
• Semantic complexity, conceptual vagueness• Etymological meaning / metaphorical
derivation• Implications: Power and hidden strategies• Goals: sincere consent
![Page 3: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Manipulative Manipulative discourse discourse : : hypotheseshypotheses
• MD is not a discourse typenot a discourse type according to pure linguistic criteria.
• MD is a type of usetype of use of language.• Identification of a manipulative
discourse is therefore a pragmatic pragmatic problemproblem.
![Page 4: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
An An a prioria priori definition definition
• MD is a discourse that is produced MD is a discourse that is produced to persuade the addressee of a set to persuade the addressee of a set of propositions P1…Pn with specific of propositions P1…Pn with specific means Msmeans Ms.– P has some precise characteristics,
particularly on the truth-functional level.– Ms have characteristics according to the
goal of conveying the propositions P.
![Page 5: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
P and truthP and truth
• The main characteristic of P is the discrepancy of P with its objective truth-conditional value or with the truth of truth-functional conclusions normally drawn by the addressee.
![Page 6: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Manipulators, liars andManipulators, liars and psychoticspsychotics
• The manipulator is not a psychoticnot a psychotic: He knows that P is not, or may not He knows that P is not, or may not be, consistent with realitybe, consistent with reality.
• The manipulator is not (simply) a liarnot (simply) a liar. He produces axioms / dogmas.
• The manipulator short-circuits normal short-circuits normal information processinginformation processing and reality / likeliness checking.
![Page 7: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Px as a moral statementPx as a moral statement
• When P is a moral statement (or equivalent, as a desired state of the world and of the society), then there is no truth-conditional checking but an evaluation of the acceptability of the statement with regard to the ethical values / background of the addressee.
![Page 8: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Cultural and moral Cultural and moral checkingchecking
• The proposition P is then evaluated with regard to the moral culturemoral culture of the concerned society.
• The moral culture C is a set of moral assumptions that sanction the acceptability of P.
• The weaker C, the stronger P, the The weaker C, the stronger P, the more successfully P is conveyedmore successfully P is conveyed.
![Page 9: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Evaluation of PEvaluation of P
Consistency of Pwith states of affairsassumed to be true
Consistency of Pwith states of affairs
assumed to be desirable
And / or
Consistency of P withother Prop. forming an argumentation
Consistency of P withother Prop. forming an argumentation
![Page 10: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Local and global meansLocal and global means
• Local meansLocal means (about processing of a given utterrance or discourse)
• Global meansGlobal means (about external factors that influence context construction)
![Page 11: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Linguistic local strategies: Linguistic local strategies: some casessome cases
• Rhetorical devices, syntactic-semantic features
• Connotative lexical items, misuse of concepts / presuppositions and implicatures
• Religious and religious-like concepts and imitation of religious “style”
• Unmotivated or questionable analogies• Metaphor, vague terms and general
fuzziness
![Page 12: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
• Attitude• Prosodic features• Appeal to emotion• Typeface and layout
Non-linguistic local strategiesNon-linguistic local strategies
![Page 13: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Linguistic Linguistic global global
strategiesstrategies
• Spreading and repetition of specific words• Generalization of a new terminology• Elimination of some lexical items• Unmotivated or misleading analogies
(again)• Acronyms, abbreviations, numbers• Naming of elements of the everyday
environment
![Page 14: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Non-linguistic global Non-linguistic global strategiesstrategies
• Group pressure• Power and punishment• Construction of the god-like image of
the manipulator, or of transcendent-like dogmas
![Page 15: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
• Fuzziness creates trouble (a double-binddouble-bind and an assumption about self assumption about self incompetenceincompetence).
• The only way to solve the double-bind is the belief in the manipulator’s wordbelief in the manipulator’s word.
• The manipulator appears as the saviour but is in fact forcing the addressee into a relation of intellectual, psychological intellectual, psychological and moral dependenceand moral dependence.
Fuzziness againFuzziness again
![Page 16: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The manipulative intentionThe manipulative intention
• The central way to avoid identification of the manipulative intention resides in the god-god-like imagelike image of the manipulator.
• Cognitive assumption: humans are equipped with a mind-reading abilitymind-reading ability (theory of mind).
• This applies normally to other humansother humans, but cannot apply legitimately to a god-like cannot apply legitimately to a god-like creaturecreature. The manipulated blocks some aspects of this natural ability when interpreting the manipulator’s discourse.
![Page 17: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Not everybody...Not everybody...
• …is manipulation sensitive. It needs to be accepted that the speaker is not an ordinary human being.
• Knowledge of the mechanisms of manipulation and proper analysis of discourse
![Page 18: Manipulation, discourse and cognitive science: preliminary hypotheses](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052306/545646a2af795994188b4d55/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Thank you for your Thank you for your attentionattention