Seonglae ChoGood
인생을 지혜롭게 살아가는 방법 중 하나는 사람을 함부로 평가하지 않는 것이다
사람에게는 분명히 배푼만큼 돌아온다
사람한테 투자한다는 생각은 오히려 친절을 불러일으키는 생각이 될수도 - 로우 리스크 하이 리턴
타인의 친절에 기댈 줄 알아야. 어렵다고 관계 회피 말고 관계로 최대한 서로 얻을 수 있는 방향으로 방법론 만들기
남을 끌어래리기는 악순환의 첫스텝
친절함에 대한 판단은 단기적인 판단이고 옳음에 대한 판단은 장기적인 판단이다
친절함에 대한 판단은 감정적 무의식적 판단이고 옳음에 대한 판단은 이성적 의식적 판단이다
하지만 무의식과 의식의 경계가 유동적이고 명확하지 않듯 친절함과 옳음의 경계도 명확하지 않다
Computational Kindness
People often act like this, and they tend to assume they're doing the other person a favor by being so open and flexible. The problem with this however is that it's computationally unkind: it offloads all the effort of coming up with ideas and making decisions to the other person. So what's the computationally kind way of approaching this situation? You could name a (not too long) list of concrete proposals of how you could spend your time. And on top of this (rather than instead of it) you can make sure to point out that you're open to anything and are happy to change plans in any way. This way, the other person can decide themselves how much cognitive effort to invest.
Responsibility Offloading
A somewhat similar pattern to computational kindness is that of offloading responsibility. Saying "Throw me out any time!" is the kind thing to say, blind to the drawbacks this comes with. She now has to feel solely responsible for terminating the hangout. Ask Culture is very explicit, avoids ambiguity and creates common knowledge within a group of people about where a certain responsibility lies. But it's also the case that this type of responsibility offloading tends to come at a cost for people with certain personalities, or people of (self-perceived) lower status in a given setting. So, not ask binary questions such as "is it fine if I smoke a cigarette?" but rather quantitative ones such as "on a scale of 0 to 10, how irritated would you be if I smoked a cigarette now?".
- "Do you want me to cover some of the fuel cost?"
- "How much do I owe you for fuel?"
The Fake Exit Option
On the surface, asking them for confirmation this way and allowing them to change their mind seems like the kind thing to do. But in practice you just make the person own their initial decision, while once again shifting the responsibility for this whole situation fully to them. So what can we do? What would a "real" exit option look like? It's hard to say, and very much depends on the concrete situation and people involved. Ideally you would think ahead far enough to avoid ending up in such situations to begin with. If it does happen anyway, some sensible things might be: First, talk it through with the person in private rather than in front of a bigger group, which reduces the social cost of them changing their mind. Second, suggest a time-out, and ask them to postpone that decision for some time, to ensure they have more time to reflect or possibly make the decision for them.
Taking so many ifs and buts into account just makes you a hopeless overthinker who never spontaneously communicates anything because there's always some risk that what you say or ask may make people uncomfortable. If for instance you've often been inadvertently pressured into decisions and didn't feel comfortable to stand up for your preferences, then you're probably more aware of this issue in your own communication. But a lot of people, a lot of the time, don't consciously notice these patterns, so we keep bumping into them blindly, which is not a great situation to be in.
