Discussions

Force and Persuasion: Agents of Change, Head to Head.

Posted by DaneMorgan • 10/12/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: change, force, persuasion

There are essentially two ways to effect change, whether external or internal. Through force or through persuasion.

I stumbled on a passage in a Letter written by John Adams where he described the American Revolution as having been complete before the beginning of the war, as the change had already taken root in the hearts and minds of the colonists.

Often I think we opt for force of one kind or another as a first course of action, but force is inefficient as an agent of change, requiring a constant expenditure of energy to maintain.

Persuasion, on the other hand, does not often immediately show results, but it's effects are long lasting and take the form of a perpetual motion machine yielding more power than the input over time, and entrenching the change so as to be resistant of further changes.

dontcallmesir.com/ideas/effecting-change-force-persuasion/

What path do you usually use to effect change in your environment? In yourself?

User Comments

10/12/08

pointlessbanter

I think just starting to enact a change on some level gets others on board. Usually when you discuss change over and over or plan out something with 50 people the passion for the change gets destroyed. By getting the ball rolling in some small way and using it as an example of what can be done or as a build block has greater impact.

In my personal life I feel that is the same thing. If I want to start working out for example I do much worse planning on going to a gym or buying membership and planning out a routine. If I just go outside and run I find that I stay on task and do it more consistently.

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  I agree. Whenever we focus on the next best step, we are always going to move toward our goals more quickly.
  
  But you're a little further down the curve than me on this topic. I'm talking about the impetus to get out there on that run. Do you force yourself to do so, or do your persuade yourself.
  
  My premise is that if you can persuade yourself to take that run, you'll be more likely to still be running in a month or six.
2. 10/12/08
  
  pointlessbanter
  
  Force. I know all the reasons of why it is important for me to go on that run. Persuading myself to do it doesn't work. I have to pull myself up by the bootstraps and do it.
10/12/08

clioandme

I'm going to have to catch up with this later, but I do want to congratulate you on this personal blog, which also has a great title and about page.

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  Thanks Mark. Appreciated.
10/12/08

Anok

Persuasion. And, if I must force, as a last resort.

I'll come back in a bit to look over more of what you've written!

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  Heh... You're just too busy attacking evil capitalists in another thread.
10/12/08

SweetViolet

Well, I agree about the long-term effectiveness of force vs. persuasion, but some people aren't moved much by either. People with good critical thinking skills and/or a high degree of stubbornness in their natures will resist force outright but are unlikely to succumb to persuasion. These people will change for reasons inside themselves rather than having been forced or lead down the garden path.

And while I am certain Adams was right about people having already made their change of allegiance in their hearts, I'm not convinced it was persuasiveness on the part of the Sons of Liberty that motivated that change. If you know your history, you know that the Brits did a considerable amount of "persuasion" to the Colonists in the forms of ruinous taxation, refusing to give them a voice in Parliament, commandeering their houses for military quarters and seizing their personal goods, and bringing in non-English speaking mercenary soldiers to "maintain order." Britain's use of force caused a backlash that needed little in the way of persuasion to make the Colonists mad enough at the king to cause them to want to rebel, polemics published by the likes of Thomas Payne notwithstanding.

Persuasion does trump force as an agent of lasting change, but a personal recognition that change would be personally advantageous is the best reason. If persuasion was an effective force to bring that about, then I'd be a vegan rightwing fundamentalist nutjob, considering how often those factions have tried to persuade me to change. Interestingly, those who eat meat, have liberal leanings, and don't believe in supernatural entities in the sky have never sent me persuasive emails, knocked on my door or called me on the phone to get my vote, or tried to beat me to death with their dogma. And yet, I am persuaded more closely to their views than away from them.

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  All of the Kings "persuasions" were tantamount to force applied after the fact of the Sons of Liberty's successful persuasions, and I would say that those persuasions were sufficient to the task of installing a resistance to the kings force. had they been insufficient, the force would have merely re-established the current order.
  
  I bet you were persuaded to those paths long ago and over the course of many impressionable years. I would not suggest that all persuasion is equal.
2. 10/12/08
  
  SweetViolet
  
  Actually, I wasn't. I used to be a Christian until I actually started reading and thinking and came to realize what a scam it was. I was also very politically conservative until a bunch of people I knew were forced to go to Vietnam and die...which caused me to start thinking about freedom and the Constitution. The vegans are still after me...got an email from one today...but I know my nutrition and I'm not gullible (nor easily swayed emotionally), so a meat-eating lifestyle is the choice for me.
10/12/08

tatasmagik

What an interesting and thought-provoking topic.

While I am in relative agreement that persuasion is often more effective, when it comes to myself, sometimes force is the better solution. But then, I have suffered from bouts of depression... Surely this is a factor I must consider.

When talking about a revolution (or creating change in a mass of people), I think history shows (even from your own example) that one compliments the other in creating and effecting change. One without the other is likely to fall flat on it's face. Without force, people can be persuaded all they like but action is needed. Without persuasion, people will resist change, even if it is what is best.

Just my $0.02

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  One thing I considered, but did not write, because I'm not precisely sure what I think about it yet, is that the combination of an initial use of force to secure immediate compliance, followed by a campaign of effective persuasion to secure the long future of the change, might be the real most efficient (maybe even effective, but so often those two are divorced) method.
  
  It seems that this is what you are saying. I'd love to read any further thought you have in that vein.
2. 10/12/08
  
  tatasmagik
  
  I never supported the war in Iraq, but it seems to me that at this point in time, it is the only way we can "win." We have already done the force part, now we just hafta convince the Iraqi people (with persuasion) that what was done was for the betterment of their lives, government, or whatever it was our administration was attempting to do with force and that they can do it without us now. This is what I hope will happen there. 'Course, I'm a realist with dreamer-tendencies and ain't holding my breath here.
  
  Ideally, IMO, it is better to do it as you describe in the OP: that people are first persuaded and then take action to effect change. It seems to have a longer lasting impact this way, IMO.
10/12/08

timethief

G'day Dane,
Congrats on the new blog. I subscribed and linked to it. I'm not awake enough yet to give you any feedback. Catch you later.

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  Thanks, TT. Need a cuppa?
10/12/08

earthwire

nice blog...interesting thought provoking topic...

as of me... neither works... but reason does... i try to use the same for others too... I work when I am convinced about why I am doing that. Neither forcing me nor persuading will do the trick.

however i believe reason can be used only when it is there... in case u plan to invade a country there ain't many reasons that natives can buy... u'll have to force them initially and gradually convince them to accept u.

[reply]
1. 10/12/08
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  I would tend to put reason in a class with persuasion. Really, it is a form of persuasion, leading one to a conclusion by presenting the facts in a persuasive manner.
  
  Remember that how facts present themselves can be as important (or even more important) to conclusions drawn as the characteristics of the fact itself.
2. 10/12/08
  
  earthwire
  
  If you put reason and persuasion in the same category then persuasion works. However, I consider them different in their basic nature. Reason is when you know that what you are trying to achieve is logical and you urself are convinced. Persuading requires more convincing skills than facts.