Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyn13  I think that Manipulation is not defined by the action, but the intent. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plato Correct!
This is absolutely true.
Unfortunately, due to the fact that we cannot rationally say whether an intent is good or bad, we cannot determine whether an action is manipulative or not. There is no distinction between the two. |
The definition of 'manipulation' has no bearing upon whether the intent is good or bad. There are many manipulations which are generally considered to be good E.g. Manipulation of terrorists to free hostages, manipulation of plants etc.
What makes an action 'manipulation', is the (perceived) strength / existence of the intent (conscious or unconscious), rather than the subjective value you place on it.
If you perceive that an action has an observable intent associated with it, then that action becomes defined as manipulative.
I would say that, loosely speaking, 'living in the present' would be defined as unmanipulative - even if the person got what they wanted - It would not have technically occured due to manipulation.
Of course, logic is only one way of understanding and viewing reality.
Whether an action is manipulative or not, would ultimately be just whether you would 'feel' it to be.
The definition might not be logically absolutely watertight, but that applies to everything - but that doesn't mean that the word 'manipulation' has no meaning. 'Feelings' are just as valid as Logic, and are more subtle