More Subjects
Why are well-adjusted people seen more accurately?
[Name of the Writer]
[Name of the Institution]
Why are well-adjusted people seen more accurately?
Even reading people on the outside doesn't give enough clear information on what they are thinking on the inside. What I'm saying is, it can be very unpredictable to how people think or act until you actually get to know them. You may say, "I've met plenty of people and made many relationships, and a majority of them don't turn out like you think it would. Is it my personal experiences that matter, though? Not exactly, because you never know how people are until it's apparent to how their personality is. Everyone is a little different the first time you meet them compared to when you know them for, say, a year. Until you know the person's traits, knowledge, experiences, emotions, and personality, you won't really know them that well to begin with. Sounds like a lot, right? Unless you want to know what kind of behavior they possess, then you need to get to know them. You can't tell people apart by looking at them and making a judgment based on your perspective's knowledge, because we're all different than what we seem! Don't get me wrong, people can blatantly act out to make their true behavior obvious, but many people have many secrets we might not even know about.
Predicting people’s behavior goes from not super difficult to exponentially harder as you go more in-depth. In terms of responses to stimuli one can deduce multiple proper responses (responses which would provide the most gain to the person) however figuring out which one they will choose requires both a decent knowledge of that person's personality (and this is never 100% accurate, no matter how much you think you know someone, they will always find a way to surprise you). Trying to figure out exactly what they will say or do is very intriguing, not because it is impossible but because it is theoretically possible. However, this would require a fantastic amount of knowledge of that person's experiences and mentality.
In reality, figuring out how someone will react to this level of precision is phenomenally difficult but theoretically possible. I would stick to figuring out the most beneficial reactions and, if you understand the person, try to figure out what they will choose. But without full knowledge of almost every part of their entire life, you could not be 100% accurate.
This is why the idea of (ethically) locking someone up in a blank room and specifically controlling stimuli and reward for certain response is so neat. Eliminate as many variables as possible, and the answers become clearer. Life trains people as if they were dogs, giving them treats for doing the right things to the right stimulus, so they keep doing it.
Predicting people's behavior is a futile exercise. Why? The probability of a huge deviation always exists. Before generalizing, I must admit that there are specific cases where we know what we would be expecting. At a marriage reception, the host will smilingly receive guests. Probability of weeping and crying of a host is least expected. Likewise, in a difficult paper when students find easy question paper, they will be excited when they end up and meet outside the examination hall. If someone is weeping, it is going to be a rare sight and funny too!
When we say we want to predict the behavior of some of people we know partially or fully, we are basically using probability. Problem with probability is that assumptions stay mostly variable. Example is that a person may behave differently tomorrow in the same set of circumstances. So, a real assessment is, in fact, a gamble.
You can predict the behavior of large groups but not individuals very well. Not that we don't try: trial lawyers try to predict jury votes from the books and magazines they read, etc.. A Fox News watcher you can predict is more likely to vote for Trump than a CNN watcher. But if you pick any one person your odds of guessing wrong aren't so hot. You have to decide on what level of certainty you find acceptable, and what two things correlate enough. If you go into a sports bar when the UK is playing in the world cup, you can predict that certain beer brand consumption will go up there (more British ex-pats likely to be present). But predicting crime in advance is a fool's game. Most Muslims that hate US foreign policy are not likely to commit a terrorist act; if you add visits to Syria, visits to jihadi websites, age under 50, history of violence or mental instability, etc. you increase your predictive power, but even then you can easily be wrong. There are no pre-cogs yet.
In truth, you can't. As we go through life, we build up stored memories of events, decisions, and the results of those decisions. Our brains are capable of doing many things; including acting as comparison engines. We compare previous events to the ones we are currently experiencing. The closer one event resembles another, the more accurately we can "predict" the outcome.
If a person is acting in a similar fashion to what you have experienced before - either by your actions or someone else's actions you have witnessed - you can guess what the next action is going to be. It's really basic pattern recognition if you get down to it. But people are people. They do surprising things. They may be going down a certain action path only to take a surprising left turn and leave you scratching your head. It is better to stay mentally flexible and let events play out the way they go and be prepared to adjust to any "little" surprises.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024