The "No One's Forcing You..." argument. Where do you draw the line?

[Mounds]

Quoted from another thread:

That's the same kind of argument I've seen by people when people criticize Steve Pavlina. Don't like what he is writing? Well noone is forcing you. It's his site, he can write whatever he wants, etc. Well why criticize religions? Noone is forcing you to adopt one. Why criticize having a ***job***? Noone is forcing you to get one. Why criticize eating meat? Noone is forcing you to eat it. Why criticize Walmart? Just don't buy from them. Why criticize big business? You don't have to use their services. Why criticize Obama? He is the president of freaking US of A, he can do whatever he wants (within reason). On and on the caruzell goes.

For context purposes...

Originally Posted by Mounds, referring to WSJ article on iPad

Honestly though, look at his arguments. Surfing too much, too many addictive games, profit margins are too high, Apple cult is creeping him out (by the way... what Apple cult?) and technology will inevitably get better. In other words... b***h, b***h, b***h. Can't control yourself or don't like capitalism? Then don't buy one Don't like seeing a line of people outside the Apple store? Then don't drive past.

The complaints came down to temptation and lack of willpower (games, endless surfing), the "Apple cult" and the grass being greener on the other side of the fence (future upgrades, competitors). To me, that's a boatload of giving away your power. If you read it in that way, it's like the author of the article was creating a red herring so he doesn't have to deal with his own issues. So my solution was distance yourself from the product. End of story, lol. If it causes you that kind of grief without even owning one, then stay far, far away.
Another forum member posted the top quote, about how this same argument can be used for pretty much any criticism. I thought that might be interesting for discussion purposes.
I was once (am still?) considered the resident skeptic. I'd lurk in the LOA forums, waiting to post derogatory things. More than once, I got the "No one's forcing you..." spiel and damn it if those people weren't right. The fact is, I felt so distressed by the possibility of something outside of science, that I should have ran the other way or looked into it. Instead, I made LOA and spirituality my personal red herring...

Mounds thoughts: Whoa, never read about that in evolution textbooks...
Mounds post: LOA is GHEY!!11!!! ROFLMAO-COPTER

Eventually, I ran the other way for fear of being lynched. Then I made a commitment to focusing on relationships and connections. That resulted in a major shift, in which I decided to respect other people's models of the world, even if they weren't my model. It's a lot more fun that way!
In that case, I consider the argument to be very, very useful. I hadn't thought of it before but even with the Steve Pavlina criticism, it's a useful argument/perspective. Its kind of like standing too close to a fire and complaining about the heat. First step is to distance yourself.
So what about the other things, like Wal-Mart, jobs and religion? Is the "No one's forcing you..." perspective the be all, end all response to criticism? IMO, some situations are more complex than others. What do you guys think?

-Tim

[James81]

No one forced you to make this thread, Tim.










(someone had to do it)

[Mounds]

No one forced you to respond James.

*wags finger at James, throws egg*

[Criseyde]

I'm not ever so impressed by that argument. It's a massive catch-all that discourages critical thinking by allowing one to categorically dismiss anything she feels uncomfortable with. Also, it's hypocritical. Why would you engage with someone you perceive to just be whinging, anyway? Talk about a perfect way to keep the argument going! Better to just (cough, ) ignore those people in the first place. Eventually, if their only point is to complain, they'll get tired of it and go do something else.

Also, it sort of reminds me of people who say "this is 'murrica, if you don't like the way we do things here, THEN LEAVE!" which I used to find massively irritating and which still occurs sort of like an itch that I can't scratch properly.

[Mounds]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

I'm not ever so impressed by that argument. It's a massive catch-all that discourages critical thinking by allowing one to categorically dismiss anything she feels uncomfortable with. Also, it's hypocritical. Why would you engage with someone you perceive to just be whinging, anyway? Talk about a perfect way to keep the argument going! Better to just (cough, ) ignore those people in the first place. Eventually, if their only point is to complain, they'll get tired of it and go do something else.

Also, it sort of reminds me of people who say "this is 'murrica, if you don't like the way we do things here, THEN LEAVE!" which I used to find massively irritating and which still occurs sort of like an itch that I can't scratch properly.

Hi Criseyde,

Would you say it depends on context? I completely agreed with the argument after I realized I was pretty much raging against other people's model of the world but not so much with something like Wal-Mart.
I guess in order for something to change, you need to see the flaw. To take your example, 'murrica! I've never personally met those die-hard Americans but I've seen them posting in the comments on news stories. It can be a hard headed attitude.

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Mounds

Hi Criseyde,

Would you say it depends on context? I completely agreed with the argument after I realized I was pretty much raging against other people's model of the world but not so much with something like Wal-Mart.
I guess in order for something to change, you need to see the flaw. To take your example, 'murrica! I've never personally met those die-hard Americans but I've seen them posting in the comments on news stories. It can be a hard headed attitude.

Yes and no. I got into some pretty futile arguments about Christianity as a teenager. There wasn't much point in that, except that it helped me to clarify my own values. And, now I know a lot about the ideas that Christians use to justify their faith. It probably looked incredibly pointless and stupid to outsiders as it was occurring, but I'd say I learned from those experiences.

I did read the thread about the iPad and I tend to agree with you that it's not very productive to get all riled up over an electronic toy, but it's also not productive to get riled up over someone getting riled up over something that doesn't really matter either... oui?

I guess context matters, but there's no hard and fast line; what's worth arguing over is going to be different for everyone.

[ssandra]

I think it is always worth having an opinion and stating that opinion. That is a good thing. Being able to articulate your opinion is important.

However, if you take your opinion and see it as religion, set in stone, and try to go door by door (forum by forum) convincing people of your opinion... yeah... you might want to look for a different hobby, cause to me that is kinda pointless...

[curiouslyrandom]

Mounds thoughts: Whoa, never read about that in evolution textbooks...
Mounds post: LOA is GHEY!!11!!! ROFLMAO-COPTER

Bwahahaha! love it.

I gotta say Mounds, I did notice a change in your posts a while back, and I liked it. Whereas before I avoided most of your arguments (because arguing on teh interwebs is kinda futile and I knew I'd get sucked in), now I read and think things through. Your writing style changed, and you come across as a much more interesting person. You've always been interesting, of course, but your words reveal that more clearly now.

[James81]

Originally Posted by curiouslyrandom

Bwahahaha! love it.

I gotta say Mounds, I did notice a change in your posts a while back, and I liked it. Whereas before I avoided most of your arguments (because arguing on teh interwebs is kinda futile and I knew I'd get sucked in), now I read and think things through. Your writing style changed, and you come across as a much more interesting person. You've always been interesting, of course, but your words reveal that more clearly now.

I've noticed it as well.

[spacecadetglow]

PD-deedly-dee!

Yeah, this is one of those arguments that comes up a lot. It is my protocol to abandon the debate before it reaches that point, but of course I get sucked in sometimes. I do think persistence in these types of exchanges requires stamina and courage, so I don't knock people who do it, I just don't choose to invest my energy that way, usually. If I do, it almost always ends with me crying in the corner. lol.

Tim, what the hell are you doing posting on the Steve Pavlina forums? Are you like, always on here posting? Don't you do anything else? Teehee.

[Angela]

I don't think "no one's forcing you" is really an argument. I think it's just someone's way of saying they think you're whining.

[Servina]

I think "no-one's forcing you" can be used to negate any argument whatsoever, so I guess if you're argumentative, then it's pretty handy. It also helps when you want to negate any help anyone's given you in your life, for instance why say "Thankyou for helping me," when you can say "no-one forced you to do it?" It's a bit of a teenagers' get out clause. On the other hand, it can wipe away a whole host of emotional blackmail.

As for ipads. It depends on how susceptible you are to marketing, doesn't it? If you're easily sucked in to that sort of thing, then to a certain extent, you have been "forced," because your lack of discernment regarding marketing techniques has been used against you. Maybe suck on a little soma and you'll soon forget all about big business and its motivations.

[lifeforce]

The argument seems more like a power tactic than a real argument though. I do understand how it can be seen as a holier than though approach of saying "I´m right, you´re wrong and I don´t care what you think, I don´t even want to discuss it".

On the other side the argument can also communicate "You´re right, I DONT have an argument. But I like it, so just let it go."

[Holistic Star]

I wonder if 'No-one is forcing you' is the snarky version of 'You're probably right.'?

[Elrond]

That's the same kind of argument I've seen by people when people criticize Steve Pavlina. Don't like what he is writing? Well noone is forcing you. It's his site, he can write whatever he wants, etc. Well why criticize religions? Noone is forcing you to adopt one. Why criticize having a ***job***? Noone is forcing you to get one. Why criticize eating meat? Noone is forcing you to eat it. Why criticize Walmart? Just don't buy from them. Why criticize big business? You don't have to use their services. Why criticize Obama? He is the president of freaking US of A, he can do whatever he wants (within reason). On and on the caruzell goes.

Jeez, look at this guy. Trying to argue against an argument by dismissal by saying that "you can say that about anything"; how original. And so long-winded too... has he got nothing better to do? Got a life, much?

[James81]

Originally Posted by Servina

As for ipads. It depends on how susceptible you are to marketing, doesn't it? If you're easily sucked in to that sort of thing, then to a certain extent, you have been "forced," because your lack of discernment regarding marketing techniques has been used against you. Maybe suck on a little soma and you'll soon forget all about big business and its motivations.

We give marketing a lot of power in our society.

Do you think I could go around selling boxes of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ to people with the right marketing plan?

Perhaps if I marketed it as a prank ploy of some kind. But what if I very seriously wanted to sell ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ as a useful product to someone's life? Would I find much success there?

You see, I'm starting to think that "marketing" is not a manipulative ploy at all. I think it can *feel* manipulative because you wind up buying something that you thought you might use in a certain way, but didn't.

That is, the marketing plan just highlighted your DESIRE to have or be or do a certain thing, no?

Products that I have no interest in, don't even blip on my radar. For example, I've seen loads of commercials on TV for things and then promptly forgot about them after the ad. And then I'll see more marketing for said thing, and then I'll promptly forget it again.

One of the more common ones (that I can actually recall now that I think about it ) are those little commerative coins they are selling that is made out of metal from the ruins of Ground Zero. I just saw that the other day, actually, and I thought "Huh, it's a neat idea." And that was that. I really have no desire to own such a thing, but more power to somebody who does.

However, when I see ads for the iPad, I go nuts with desire. Because it's something I WANT. And that ad reminds me that it's something I want. And when the ad goes off, I start thinking of how I might get one. And then I realize that I'll hafta wait until I save the money for one.

I didn't do that with the coin thing, and yet I saw several typical marketing ploys in that commercial. For example, telling us "these were originally $49.95, but if you call right now, you can get them for $29.95."

That's just jam packed with typical marketing ploys. For example, the most obvious one is pretending like you were going to sell it for one price, but slashing the price down to what you really want to sell it for so it looks like you are giving people a good deal. The other obvious one is saying $29.95 instead of just saying "Hey dummies, it's 30 bucks." You knock five cents off the price, and it looks a whole lot "cheaper" that way, doesn't it? $29.95 *feels* cheaper than $30.00 doesn't it? It's not. At least not in any realistcally measureable sense.

And I'm sure there were other, less obvious marketing ploys at work in that commercial. And, yet, I feel no desire whatsoever to own a ground zero coin.

But when I see the same marketing techniques for the iPad, it comes across lots differently to me. I think, "Huh, $495 is a pretty good price for that." I don't think of it as "$500". I think of it as $495.

Kinda funny how that works, eh?

My point is that you aren't being fooled by marketing companies. Marketing companies will rarely (if ever) be able to sell you something you truly don't want. You may not be consciously aware that you want the product you buy (which is what happens when you buy something and then it just lays around), but on an unconscious level that product highlights a desire you have for *something* and it fulfills that desire in whatever way you use it.

So, in that vein, I like to thank the marketing peeps for making me aware of that desire when it's there. They do a fantastic job of hightlighting and shedding light on that desire for me.

[insanezenmistress]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

I'm not ever so impressed by that argument. It's a massive catch-all that discourages critical thinking by allowing one to categorically dismiss anything she feels uncomfortable with. Also, it's hypocritical. Why would you engage with someone you perceive to just be whinging, anyway? Talk about a perfect way to keep the argument going! Better to just (cough, ) ignore those people in the first place. Eventually, if their only point is to complain, they'll get tired of it and go do something else.

Also, it sort of reminds me of people who say "this is 'murrica, if you don't like the way we do things here, THEN LEAVE!" which I used to find massively irritating and which still occurs sort of like an itch that I can't scratch properly.

That one is so ironic....

right..this IS Um-erika....the place where because we didn't like it, we kicked butt.

first we didnt like europe and left, then we didnt like dieing in the winter so we built, then we didnt like not having a central and and balanced government so, we revolted and revolted, and compromised....and much to ben franklin's chagrin we have like wise , as Um-erikans are wont to do....we became complacent.

seems we due for a good old fashioned American kick butt.

[dan1529]

This is a GREAT thread. And I consider the "no one's forcing you argument" to be really useful to get people to think--and to choose taking action over talk.

On my food blog, I have readers all the time complaining about how the food industry makes us all fat, takes advantage of poor people, makes it so it's impossible to afford to eat healthy, etc. And of course the food industry surely does make plenty of fattening foods.

But I have yet to hear of some snivelling food industry marketing executive coming over to our homes and forcing Doritos or Oreos down our throats. When that starts happening, okay, THEN the "no one's forcing you" argument will fail.

_____________________________
Visit me at Casual Kitchen!
Cook More. Think More. Spend Less.

[MagicalRealist]

Originally Posted by Angela

I don't think "no one's forcing you" is really an argument. I think it's just someone's way of saying they think you're whining.

Yeah, it's that.

I do use "no one's forcing you" on people who are complaining just to complain.

"No one at work is forcing you to read crap like Twilight. In fact, I don't think that Twilight, or your semi-literate cow-orkers' lousy taste in books is the problem. You want to take a stab at what your real problem is, or shall I?"

Sometimes, the complainer will actually admit that yeah, the books aren't their problem, and neither is their co-workers' squeeing over it. It's that they don't like their job, don't fit in with the prevailing workplace culture, and/or have a hard time connecting with other people who love good books. And it's great when that happens because often it's the first time they've openly admitted those things.

But I'm okay with the complainers who get offended or just stand there and gape at me before walking away, too. They tend not to complain to me again after that, which suits me just fine.

[SatvikBeri]

I think "no one's forcing me" is a great mentality to have. I've noticed that I felt much worse when I was doing something because I felt like I had to. These days, I've had the realization that no one is forcing me to do anything-if nothing else, I always have the choice of dying vs. having to pay the bills/work/eat healthy/whatever.

It may or may not be a useful thing to say to other people, depending on context.

[Servina]

Originally Posted by James81

We give marketing a lot of power in our society.

Do you think I could go around selling boxes of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ to people with the right marketing plan?

Perhaps if I marketed it as a prank ploy of some kind. But what if I very seriously wanted to sell ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ as a useful product to someone's life? Would I find much success there?

You see, I'm starting to think that "marketing" is not a manipulative ploy at all. I think it can *feel* manipulative because you wind up buying something that you thought you might use in a certain way, but didn't.

That is, the marketing plan just highlighted your DESIRE to have or be or do a certain thing, no?

Products that I have no interest in, don't even blip on my radar. For example, I've seen loads of commercials on TV for things and then promptly forgot about them after the ad. And then I'll see more marketing for said thing, and then I'll promptly forget it again.

One of the more common ones (that I can actually recall now that I think about it ) are those little commerative coins they are selling that is made out of metal from the ruins of Ground Zero. I just saw that the other day, actually, and I thought "Huh, it's a neat idea." And that was that. I really have no desire to own such a thing, but more power to somebody who does.

However, when I see ads for the iPad, I go nuts with desire. Because it's something I WANT. And that ad reminds me that it's something I want. And when the ad goes off, I start thinking of how I might get one. And then I realize that I'll hafta wait until I save the money for one.

I didn't do that with the coin thing, and yet I saw several typical marketing ploys in that commercial. For example, telling us "these were originally $49.95, but if you call right now, you can get them for $29.95."

That's just jam packed with typical marketing ploys. For example, the most obvious one is pretending like you were going to sell it for one price, but slashing the price down to what you really want to sell it for so it looks like you are giving people a good deal. The other obvious one is saying $29.95 instead of just saying "Hey dummies, it's 30 bucks." You knock five cents off the price, and it looks a whole lot "cheaper" that way, doesn't it? $29.95 *feels* cheaper than $30.00 doesn't it? It's not. At least not in any realistcally measureable sense.

And I'm sure there were other, less obvious marketing ploys at work in that commercial. And, yet, I feel no desire whatsoever to own a ground zero coin.

But when I see the same marketing techniques for the iPad, it comes across lots differently to me. I think, "Huh, $495 is a pretty good price for that." I don't think of it as "$500". I think of it as $495.

Kinda funny how that works, eh?

My point is that you aren't being fooled by marketing companies. Marketing companies will rarely (if ever) be able to sell you something you truly don't want. You may not be consciously aware that you want the product you buy (which is what happens when you buy something and then it just lays around), but on an unconscious level that product highlights a desire you have for *something* and it fulfills that desire in whatever way you use it.

So, in that vein, I like to thank the marketing peeps for making me aware of that desire when it's there. They do a fantastic job of hightlighting and shedding light on that desire for me.

Give the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ idea a go James. Sounds like a runner. I'm thinking maybe an avante garde angle, with some endorsement from Tracey Emin.

We're going to have to agree to differ on this. I for one, would think mmmm ipad, or will an easier to repair laptop do it? Not knocking your ipad desire, just illustrating how I'd think about that. No amount of sexy packaging ever appeals to me with electronics. Ever. I had the same pc for years and just kept upgrading it, by the time I got rid of it, it looked like one of the robots in Jabba the Hut's palace. Maybe it's the same with men and cars.

Do you consider yourself a feminist if you like the appearance of electronic goods?

[James81]

Originally Posted by Servina

Do you consider yourself a feminist if you like the appearance of electronic goods?

I burst out laughing at this.

[Richful]

I think "No one is forcing you to....." can be a useful way to shut down someone who's whinging, sure.
(insert whinge about work) "No one is forcing you to work there" Point taken.

But I think it's also a cop-out. It shuts down the conversation and prevents any real solutions being discussed. Look at the riots in the UK about University fees going up... "No ones forcing you to go to University!"
Well no their not, but it limits your options a whole lot and creates a further divide between economic classes. But no ones forcing you to care....

[givejonadollar]

All human interactions are either voluntary or through force.

So if no one is forcing or coercing you, it's voluntary.

It's really that simple.

[sonde]

Chapter 5

Libet’s experiments point to a general concept that a little thought shows must always be valid. This is that everything that happens must happen before we can become aware of it. Any neurological or sensory process always happens before our awareness of the thought, feeling, or sensation that represents it. In Libet’s experiments, the lag of awareness was between 350 msec and 500 msec, but the exact value is unimportant. So long as this lag exists, no matter how large or small, whether it is one hour or one microsecond, our subjective experience of an event must always come after the objective measurement of the event. In other words, the subjective present always lags the objective present, or subjective time always lags objective time. [Because the brain requires about 500 msec to process an event before we can become aware of it, it is impossible for us to be aware of any instant in which the brain ceases to function, such as the instant we fall asleep (either naturally or under anesthesia), or the instant we die.]

The consequences of this insight are extraordinary, revolutionary, and far-ranging. Every thought, feeling, sensation, or action always occurs objectively before we become aware of it subjectively and hence there is no possibility that we can avoid it. This includes any choices or decisions that are made. We inescapably live in the objective past so that the objective present and future are completely beyond our awareness and control.

[Brutha]

I think you completely miss the point. You can make against most real world ideas reasonable criticism and at the same time you can make against the same ideas unreasonable criticism.

The thing that matters is the argument that the criticism makes. An argument about positive freedom has another burden of evidence than an argument about negative freedom.

With criticizing Steve's articles you should start by separating three kinds of criticism.
1) The article about not getting a job is gives bad advice.
2) The article about not getting a job has factual inaccuracies.
3) The article about not getting a job is offensive.

If you criticize the article based on 3) then the answer is: Of course it's offensive, it's supposed to be offensive and when you don't like offensive articles than you shouldn't visit this place or 4Chan.
If you make effective criticisms based on 3) you have the burden of understanding why Steve thinks it's a good idea to be offensive and target Steve's reasons for doing so.

I was once (am still?) considered the resident skeptic.

I would consider you to be a pseudoskeptic who believes in physicalism.

The fact is, I felt so distressed by the possibility of something outside of science,

Basically you are someone who's deeply emotionally committed to a belief system instead of being traditional skeptic.

What does this have to with the point from above? You see conflicts as being conflicts between two sides. One side has the right position and the other is by extension wrong.

The real world is often more complicated. There can be a lot than two sides and usually all position have a few flaws.
Being a good skeptic includes knowing that your own positions have some flaws. To make scientific progress is essential to understand the flaws of the current scientific positions.

[LostMyMap]

Ah time to jump in the middle of a juicy Mounds thread. No one is forcing me, I chose

Well the old guys used to say "you can talk about anything around here, 'cept politics and religion". In the Internet age, I would add Apple products. I'm not even going to read the ipad thread. I've been seeing people get all bent about any criticism of their precious Apple products for the last 20 years, and if that's what happened there, I'll pass, thanks.

No one is forcing me, so I mostly avoid those sorts of discussions that have no end point and result in people getting all up in their fanatical fervor. And anytime I make an exception to that, I usually regret it.

If someone says to you "no one is forcing you..." and you shut down the conversation after that, well you did that yourself, no one forced you.

Where do you draw the line? Well it starts with your intent. If someone is appearing powerless, and you point it out to them in this way, maybe you are just trying to be helpful, or at least observant. If you are throwing out the phrase in question just to be snarky, well...

Oh and one more thing:

"May the force be with you"