This is generally a phrase used in terms of a long con act, the mark being the target and playing being the con. Over the last few months I've noticed again that the last half of my life has essentially been one long con played to different marks and for no real prize; kind of adds a new level to the amount of stupidity that one person can do. But that was an aside. [Editors note: Just in case you hadn't noticed yet, Alphonse has problems staying on a point]. But that out of the way, how often do you play a mark? And I'm actually curious; how often to you act as someone that you aren't for whichever purpose? Do you act differently at work than you would like to be acting? Are you an actual confidence trickster who makes his living out of being whoever you need to be?
Psychologically there's a couple of reasons that people do this. It's either out of the desire to gain an advantage, or out of the need to allay a threat, perceived or real. You see this easily in the school yard: Kids lie to get out of trouble, or they lie to gain an advantage over others (ie, cheating).
It's interesting that one of these is often considered to be a positive thing - no one complains when a kid says that his dad will beat you up if you take his lunch [Editor's note: It has obviously been a while since Alphonse was that age] - but everyone will complain if you cheat on an exam. The same action has two completely different responses.
This wasn't the point that I was wanting to get to, but it's where we are now [Editors note: Told you he couldn't stay on a point]. No move made out of weakness is viewed negatively. As a clear and obvious example, a valid defence for homicide is that it was in self defence, and I think there are now precedents that would allow pre-emptive defence in the case of good evidence for a threat. Which would mean that you can take a pre-meditated action and essentially claim that it was an instant response to information that may or may not have been true. I'm not sure if this is the actual case as I don't have to keep track of legal precedents in homicide law any more.
Anyway, the point of that part is that a move made out of weakness is applauded when the same movement made out of strength, even to prevent weakness from occurring, is frowned upon. Even against the normal fairness of the world, that don't seem right.
Just something that struck me as interesting as I started to write about something completely different.
Psychologically there's a couple of reasons that people do this. It's either out of the desire to gain an advantage, or out of the need to allay a threat, perceived or real. You see this easily in the school yard: Kids lie to get out of trouble, or they lie to gain an advantage over others (ie, cheating).
It's interesting that one of these is often considered to be a positive thing - no one complains when a kid says that his dad will beat you up if you take his lunch [Editor's note: It has obviously been a while since Alphonse was that age] - but everyone will complain if you cheat on an exam. The same action has two completely different responses.
This wasn't the point that I was wanting to get to, but it's where we are now [Editors note: Told you he couldn't stay on a point]. No move made out of weakness is viewed negatively. As a clear and obvious example, a valid defence for homicide is that it was in self defence, and I think there are now precedents that would allow pre-emptive defence in the case of good evidence for a threat. Which would mean that you can take a pre-meditated action and essentially claim that it was an instant response to information that may or may not have been true. I'm not sure if this is the actual case as I don't have to keep track of legal precedents in homicide law any more.
Anyway, the point of that part is that a move made out of weakness is applauded when the same movement made out of strength, even to prevent weakness from occurring, is frowned upon. Even against the normal fairness of the world, that don't seem right.
Just something that struck me as interesting as I started to write about something completely different.
No comments:
Post a Comment