Our View Of The World, And Selling It To Others

We all have our own understanding about the way the world works.  I like to refer to this individual way of viewing things as our “view of the world”.  Our view of the world might include that, say, Obama is the president, grass is green, James and Samantha are our friends from college, and that we love chocolate-covered strawberries.

Depending on our political and religious beliefs, it might also include Obama being an “outstanding” or a “disaster” president, and it might include “we are physical machines described by the laws of physics” or alternatively, “Jesus is my Lord and Savior”.  We also have thoughts about what other people’s attitudes and beliefs are (such as “he did that because he only cares about himself”) as well as what we think the best course of action is in a given situation (“we should raise taxes to pay for the fight against global warming”).  Even our understanding of what happened in the past is part of our view of the world.  By a “view of the world” then, I simply mean everything we believe to be true about the world.

Our views of the world are, ultimately, in our heads.  Sometimes we have good reasons for our beliefs, sometimes they are based on incorrect information, and sometimes they are just guesses.  Sometimes we’re right, and sometimes we’re wrong.

When we’re interacting with other people, our views of the world often differ.

And we often want other people to accept our view of the world and attempt to “sell” them on our view.  For example, we might want others to agree with our political or religious beliefs (“We should present all sides of the story in biology, including intelligent design” vs. “Intelligent design goes against everything we know from science and doesn’t belong in the classroom”).  We might want others to agree with our view of the past (“You told me I could return this vacuum cleaner if it was defective!” vs. “I told you you have to contact the manufacturer with any problems!”).  And, we might want others to agree with our evaluation of ourselves (“I am an excellent driver” vs. “You are a terrible driver”).

We directly observe only a very few things, and yet we need to know about many things that we don’t directly observe — so we have to make guesses and inferences about things we don’t know.  Our views of the world are then part direct observation and part guessing (based on reasoning, past experiences, feelings, etc.).  This is one reason why there is so much room for disagreement, since much of everyone’s view of the world is not directly observable.  There is no easy way to verify who is right, so we argue about the more indirect parts of our views of the world.

For example, let’s say a member of Congress has been accused of spending public money for private vacations.  His opponents might have a view of the world that includes, unsurprisingly, that this congressman knowingly spent public money for lavish personal vacations.  The congressman himself on the other hand, might have a view of the world that holds that the trips were for legitimate official business, or that they were paid for with his own money and not the public’s.  So while the two sides have very different views of the world in some ways, they both agree that certain trips were taken.  The very fact that some of the information is not commonly known (what was done on the trips, where did the money come from) allows there to be disagreement about how to “fill in the gaps” around the known information.

These “not easily verifiable” areas are where “spin” comes in, in politics and in relationships in general.  In this example, the agreed on facts might be that this congressman took certain trips, and that he is being investigated.  Both sides then try to fill in the additional details with (and get others to believe) their own preferred view of things.  In this case the two sides might be “more corruption in Washington” vs. “a politically-motivated witch hunt targeting an innocent man”.  This also illustrates that

we sometimes want others to accept views of the world that we ourselves don’t believe

(whether this turns out to be a good idea or not).  In sales, we might want someone to believe that our brand of fertilizer is the best, even if we don’t think so ourselves.  In a job interview, we might want the interviewer to think that we’re outstanding in all areas, even if we have some doubts about some of our abilities.  And of course, sometimes we just outright lie about things (Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!”).

For right or wrong, there are practical reasons then why someone might try to sell others on a view they don’t themselves believe.  And there are (important) “values questions” about whether or not doing this is in general a good idea.  But aside from these, I’m particularly interested in this question from a “great relationships” perspective:

Are there times when trying to sell others on a view of the world you don’t hold is a good idea, in terms of helping you have great relationships?

This is related to previous posts (such as this one about being yourself and this one about great relationships).  In particular, it seems that sometimes getting people to accept certain views of the world can be a good thing (such as thinking they themselves are “awesome” or that the two of you have a close relationship).  At the same time, it also seems that being authentic and sharing your real thoughts and feelings makes for good relationships.  Many times there is no conflict — you actually believe the things that you want others to believe.  But what about times when you don’t quite believe the things you’d like people to accept?

Let me give an example.  Let’s say you have a problem with low self-esteem.  You don’t think you’re good at most things, but you know you have this problem and you’re working on it.  You’d like other people to believe you’re confident.  Does it make sense to act “as if” you’re confident?  This might help others like you more and treat you with more respect, and might even help you actually have more confidence.  However, as I’ve mentioned before, I think that sharing more of your real self in an authentic way has some strong benefits (such as feelings of intimacy).  And I think that sometimes being fake or pretending to support a view of the world that you don’t really hold can get in the way of those benefits.

Having said that, my current thinking is that there are some times when trying to sell a view of the world that is slightly different from the one you actually hold can be overall beneficial and have limited impact on the benefits of authenticity.  In this example, I think that trying to project confidence when you don’t really have it (within limits) can actually help you have more confidence, and can help others enjoy being around you more.  I do think you still have to be grounded in reality, and if you’re really anxious, admitting this might be the best thing to do.  And all of this should take place in a context of openness and authenticity, so that, for example, if someone asks you point blank if you’re nervous, you might share that you were (but perhaps in a funny way or with a dose of confidence thrown in, so they don’t incorrectly think you’re more anxious than you are).

As another example, take intentionally “misinterpreting” what someone says.  If someone asks you with a rude tone of voice “Why did you do that?”, you may believe they’re implying “that was a stupid thing to do”, but you can act as if they were asking you a legitimate question because they were interested.  So you can respond “Oh, because I love the theater and was interested in …” etc. — responding as if they asked a real question.  This can throw them off, since they now have to work harder to be a jerk — they have to be more direct in saying they think you did something stupid (which they may not be able to do without looking like a jerk).

I do think you have to be careful because if you do too much “selling views you don’t hold” you will come off as (and feel) fake.  I suspect that being authentic is a very important principle (for having great relationships) but that in a few judicious ways you can benefit from slight changes to the view of the world you’re selling, and still maintain an overall feel (and reality) of authenticity.  As always, I love to hear any thoughts on this.