The Social Animal. You'll find it listed among text books, but truthfully it is just the definitive book on social psychology and everyone else is too intimidated to try and write a competing, more textbook-like option while he is still alive.
Won't do you any good though. Learning how to be a snake that studies the habits of men in order to manipulate them might make you wise in the eyes of the world, but a fool in the eyes of God. By manipulating people you will inevitably become a misanthrope, because you will become to see people as pawns to be played. You will forget how to love, and you will be miserable in this world, even before you are condemned to hell forever for being so hard of heart.
>>7586501 plus by developing this false face, this mask by which you intend to charm and seduce people; you might win the admiration of vain people but you will NEVER win their heart or devotion. Even the dumbest of men can detect genuine love when he sees it, and is willing to die for someone who genuinely loves them. By practicing the art of deceit you will make it literally impossible for you to genuinely love someone, and so all you can ever hope to have is vapid followers who will dump you the moment someone more charming, attractive, or useful comes along.
>>7586325 > picking up women is capitalism > making people feel better (thus, making them like you) is capitalism > making smalltalk with people in the library to start overcoming your crippling depression is capitalism
>>7586540 Wow, the world must really revolve around you huh No one else in the whole world could have come across literally the most recommended self improvement book in the world and wanted to talk about it without referencing you niche little podcast Seriously kill yourself you retarded cunt
>>7587483 When there's something strange in the neighbourhood, who you gonna call? If Stalin's here, and there's no more food, who you gonna call? I ain't afraid of no reds. Human nature agrees, and the Khmer Rouge's free, who you gonna call? Profits make me feel good
>how to become a slimy 1950s white collar american salesman with no defining personal characteristic the book decent as a self-help book but outdated - social interaction is inherently more complex and multi-faceted compared to the 30s given the difference in diversity with regards to class/race/etc.
>>7587598 > A race of animals who still cannot grasp the difference between an airhorn and a charging mammoth have achieved a paradigm shift in their communication in 80 years but muh culture > culture won't change your parasympathetic perception of smiling, or the dopamine released by speaking about your favourite subjects
>>7587645 >>7587653 of course the basics haven't changed (smiling for example) but that doesn't mean social interaction hasn't become more nuanced/layered/complicated. That book could hardly prepare you for the way social interaction occurs on this website, for example. Mass telecommunications and immigration and so forth have resulted in a rather large change in the way we converse and form interpersonal connections with others I would argue
>>7587761 language is hardly the end all of social interaction
the words/body/dialect/tone/etc. I use varies dramatically throughout a typical day depending on who I'm with (I would say this is a result of mass telecommunications and the social melting pot that is any Western anglophone country); to this end I would say the primary difference between now and the 30s is the fluidity of social interaction - social rules seem less rigid and thus Carnegie's book is less useful
>>7587857 > words/body/dialect/tone This is all part of language. Understand the concept of language not as "the words you say" but as "the medium used for communication". This would make, say, a punch in the face language.
Attached, the rules carnegie proposed. At worst, I see them somewhat cowardly (Rules #10 & #11), and somewhat obsolete/demode (#19 or #24). At best, they are quintessential relationship principles, even today.
The idea of more fluid comms (by this I interpret less rigid, less implicit-rule-driven, more spontaneous) is interesting. However, I suspect you are approaching this topic with an image in mind, an image of a used car salesman pictured through a black and white TV set (Figuratively, obviously). Transcending this image towards the principles espoused (and hopefully, putting them into practice) will show how valuable all this really is.
>>7589105 >>7589110 >In America, a smile is usually regarded as a friendly, positive gesture of trust. Historians have suggested that because the USA was initially a frontier society with little official law enforcement, the ability to communicate that “I am a friend” was quite important. In contrast, among some Asian societies people smile when they are embarrassed, angry, sad, confused, apologetic, and (sometimes) happy. http://scienceblogs.com/retrospectacle/2007/08/08/the-crosscultural-meanings-of-1/
>putting the other person first in your menial encounters >dick-sucking Proof you haven't tried not being a selfish shitdick before.
People naturally enjoy when someone shows them gratitude, affection, or interest. Why? Because most people simply don't do this. Their interactions with people are shallow and selfish and they don't even bother emphasizing the person's name. That is not "dick-sucking", it's not being a shit-bag. The fact anyone would think it's not useful to know these things goes to show how necessary the book still is.
>>7588528 Do not care about your own perception of yourself. Only care about what others think. adapt yourself based on other peoples aesthetic ideals, take this advice if youre going into business/music/fashion
I'm having a problem with one of the concepts of the book if anyone can help me. Criticism is not ok according to the book and I understand what he is saying, but what about punishment? They are separate thing correct, you can punish a person without criticizing them and still have a positive impact?
>>7591270 But let's say you run a business. You have a employee who keeps running late. How are you going to get it across to other employees that it's not alright to be late without firing/punishing him? Sad with the military, an organization like that would absolutely fall apart without negative enforcement. I really want to believe what he is saying but I can't.
>>7591291 So you want to run your relations like the military? Or do you want to rely on the effectiveness of the people in your life? If they are late, they know it. If you want to micro-manage them, that becomes your problem. It drags you down and people will see you meting out your petty punishments. I wouldn't want to be seen in that light.
>>7591308 Me neither, but I don't want to be take advantage of either. The other extreme is that people are not motivated enough by positive enforcement alone. Why do you think companies continue to write up people who are late? Because everyone would come it late if they didn't and the company would be seen as a pushover. I just think Carnegie might be pushing to extreme you know what I mean?
>>7591244 um, i wasn't really referring to the post >>7587958, just the image. but yeah, most of those principles seem like great ways to get someone else in a state of mind/position to be easily manipulated.
>>7591328 If you are building them as s person and never critics cont them they are only letting you influence them as much as they want to be influenced. You can't control them through fear therefore you can't possibly manipulate them.
>>7591335 you seem to suggest fear is the only way to manipulate someone?? pure silliness.
and 'they are only letting you influence them as much as they want to be influenced'? really? sounds like a perfect manipulation tactic: 'oh, i didn't make you think i was someone to be trusted based on the way i acted with you, ...however i used you is essentially your fault, you are the one who ultimately let me influence you...'
do you truly not see how you can use the principles of this book to manipulate others....
>>7591371 No, but I'm suggesting that you cannot only work through positive incentives alone. >>7591365 Nah fear isn't the only way to manipulate people you are right. I suppose you could use this book for manipulation of you wanted to, if you are a decent enough person you won't though. This books tells you how to obtain power it does't tell you what to do with it imo.
>>7591390 You can. In fact, the only way forward in any conflict of interest is positive incentive. This is the very basis of diplomacy. You sweep the differences under the rug and instead find common interest.
Regardless. I'm getting too drunk for this shit. I have already made one or two errors in judgement. If you find someone in another thread arguing vehemently about mundane affairs, make sure to say hello.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.