Story Telling

Storytelling has been used down through the ages in virtually every culture and by all great leaders. Virtually every President and Prime Minister uses this technique to convince you his chosen example is the only one that matters.

Why? Simply, because it works! Story telling invokes the various physiological changes and psychological reactions causing us to feel empathy for the portrayed characters. That’s why you feel like you can take on the world after watching Superman or depressed watching Sophies’ Choice or The Green Mile. The effects are accentuated because storytelling bypasses or reduces Confirmation Bias. Furthering this effect, the brain cannot differentiate between Real or Imagined behaviours. This is why Storytelling is used most powerfully when statistical or supporting data is non-existent, very weak or when you are trying to generate Blind Faith.

Storytelling is used specifically to either create or break Confirmation Bias, especially when countering hard truth and legitimate statistics (ie; convince you outright lies or Part Truth’s are not just real but prevalent)

BASED ON THE RESEARCH OF Rebecca J. Krause and Derek D. Rucker

Rucker and Krause knew from other research that stories appear to reduce what psychologists call counterarguing—those skeptical thoughts that make you think “no way” when presented with information.

The conventional wisdom said that using stories—also known as narratives—to convey information was an effective tool for persuasion. But when the researchers looked into it, they found the evidence was mixed. Sometimes stories were convincing: they led people to view a product or idea more favorably. But in other situations, stories didn’t seem to change people’s views more than facts alone.

The researchers— Derek Rucker, a professor of marketing at the Kellogg School, and PhD student Rebecca Krause—were intrigued. Why did stories sometimes help and sometimes hurt? When are facts alone better than stories? So they set out on a great journey, hoping to learn all they could about narratives and persuasion.

For Rucker and Krause, this particular story has a happy ending in the form of a new paper answering those very questions.
They found that the persuasiveness of narratives depends on whether the facts they contain are strong or weak. If you have a powerful case and an ironclad set of facts on your side, stories might do you no favors, the research revealed—you’re better off presenting that content in a straightforward way, like a list. By contrast, if you are trying to sell people on slightly less convincing information, stories can vastly increase your audience’s receptiveness.

Top Level educators who teach High level business people state;

As social creatures, we depend on others for our survival and happiness. A decade ago, my lab discovered that a neurochemical called oxytocin is a key “it’s safe to approach others” signal in the brain. Oxytocin is produced when we are trusted or shown a kindness, and it motivates cooperation with others. It does this by enhancing the sense of empathy, our ability to experience others’ emotions. Empathy is important for social creatures because it allows us to understand how others are likely to react to a situation, including those with whom we work.

More recently my lab wondered if we could “hack” the oxytocin system to motivate people to engage in cooperative behaviors. To do this, we tested if narratives shot on video, rather than face-to-face interactions, would cause the brain to make oxytocin. By taking blood draws before and after the narrative, we found that character-driven stories do consistently cause oxytocin synthesis. Further, the amount of oxytocin released by the brain predicted how much people were willing to help others; for example, donating money to a charity associated with the narrative.

If you want the full story of how Facts and Statistics should be used, watch the whole video, if you just want to see how to MASK truth start at 15 minute mark.

Let’s see if you can recognise this highly proven methodology in the Garbage, non-statistical Man-Bashing Radical Feminist advertisements being pushed by the movement of the viciousness of men

for example, by describing the pitiable situations of actual, named (or visualised) customers and how their problems were solved by your efforts. Make your people empathize with the pain the customer experienced and they will also feel the pleasure of its resolution – all the more if some heroics went in to reducing suffering or struggle, or producing joy.

Whether used for the good of spreading a real story such as restoring sight by Fred Hollows organisation or for mor sinister purposes of portraying very rare behaviours as “Normality”

As storytellers we get the opportunity to step into another person’s shoes and see what they see, feel how they feel, experience things we’d never have access to. We get to learn about all the fascinating things going on right under our noses that we never knew were there. And then we get to bring others along on the adventure and, when done right, inspire them to start exploring for themselves.

The Mere Exposure Effect

Have you noticed how the same Man-Bashing ads are shown on a repetitious cycle? Have you noticed the shortened versions of the same ads? Pay attention, you will. The repetition produces what’s a very well known Psychological phenomenon called the Mere Exposure Effect. The mere-exposure effect is a psychological phenomenon by which people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them. In social psychology, this effect is sometimes called the familiarity principle.

Mere Exposure Effect can be so strong, subliminal use has been outlawed in most countries

The most obvious application of the mere-exposure effect is in advertising, but research on its effectiveness at enhancing consumer attitudes toward particular companies and products has been mixed, however, it’s use certainly appears to build credibility displaying statistically incorrect data.

Real or Imagined

The psychology being applied with derogatory Male presentation is not just extremely clever, the effects can be extremely disastrous.

Once introduced, especially repetitively, Confirmation Bias is doing its job, the brain will interpret what it sees very differently creating an avalanche of catastrophic outcomes.

I’ll give a basic example, 5 ladies go out to a day at the horse races. Based on their lifetime teachings creating their individual Confirmation bias these are likely opinions the 5 individuals may have from identical observations;

  1. What a lovely day, out in the glorious weather with my friends having a wonderful time. How could life get better?
  2. Those poor horses, all being treated cruelly, being forced to run, wasn’t it just horrible?
  3. Wow, did you see those well dressed, cute guys that were too shy to come and start a conversation? I wish they had.
  4. Did you see those pervs that kept drooling over us and treating us as Sex Objects?
  5. Gee, that was a great day, my research paid off, I came home $120.00 richer.

With that in mind, consider how you’ll interpret the interactions you see on a day to day basis. If you have a massively skewed high prevalence view of MALE violence, MALE disrespect, MALE sexual deviancy, MALE tyrannical oppression and MALE patriarchal dominance, do you really think you’ll project outcomes accurately? The constant barrage of Anti-Male publicity being put in front of your eyeballs, no matter what you watch, read or see is slowly permeating your interpretational judgement, just like the horse race example above.

The timeless, underlying element remains, regardless of who’s theories you follow, Telling stories bypasses the brains normal truth detection and filters introducing. It does this by encouraging Confirmation Bias,

With this constant slew of unrealistic Male-Degradation stereotypes, unless you’re very strongly a “Facts and Data” person (Male of Female), it’s virtually impossible to interpret day to day interactions you see correctly. You WILL start seeing everyday interactions and interpreting them differently, agreeing with the epidemic of Evil Male portrayal. This is the exact model used by most religions to teach their followers “acceptable vs. unacceptable” behaviour instincts. I’ll say that another way, religions aim to teach you situational interpretation so you can recognise “Good and Bad” behaviour by telling moralistic stories.

Then comes the trump card.

The mind finds it near impossible tell the difference between real or imagined behaviours. Once you have interpreted an interaction incorrectly, your subconscious takes over. You will always then see your incorrect interpretation as both REAL and FACT, even though the interpretation was just your conditioned mind’s forward prediction of what you saw.

So when you see an interaction happening between others, your Bias will take control, painting whatever picture your biassed thoughts wish to have seen.

This happens much more heavily in emotionally charged environments. For instance, in scenarios you see a male and a female disagreeing, the conditioned mind will look for imaginative ways, based on what may have happened prior or what is likely to happen in the future. Imagined justification will be found in most scenarios to visualise fault due to the MALE violence, MALE disrespect, MALE sexual deviancy, MALE tyrannical oppression and MALE patriarchal dominance programming you’ve undergone. The mind cannot differentiate truth between real and imagined situations.

The sceptics and Feminists will be yodelling what a fool this writer is to come up with this, but these aren’t my ideas, they’re solidly proven facts

Judging by the brain scans in the image, it doesn’t seem so. The scans are from one of my favourite pieces of research.

Volunteers were asked to play a simple sequence of piano notes each day for five consecutive days. Their brains were scanned each day in the region connected to the finger muscles. Another set of volunteers were asked to imagine playing the notes instead, also having their brains scanned each day.

The top two rows in the image show the changes in the brain in those who played the notes. The middle two rows show the changes in those who simply imagined playing the notes. Compare this with the bottom two rows showing the brain regions of the control group, who didn’t play nor imagine playing, piano.

You can clearly see that the changes in the brain in those who imaged playing piano are the same as in those who actually played piano. Really, your brain doesn’t distinguish real from imaginary!

It’s pretty obvious when you think about it. The stress response evolved in humans to give us the ability to fight or flee when faced with danger. Chemicals including cortisol and adrenaline help kick start the body, pushing blood towards the major muscles to give you strength.

But the exact same stress response kicks in when you imagine danger, also producing cortisol and adrenaline and pushing blood around the body. The same chemistry is produced regardless of whether the danger is real or imagined.

What does all this mean in real life? It means that what you imagine to be happening is actually happening as far as your brain is concerned.

Waaallaaa! Your programmed lessons are now proving themselves to be actual fact, well, in your mind anyway!

Leave a Reply