One of the biggest political obstacles is that you can warn repeatedly about something that is actually, in fact, true - climate change or Trump having fascist tendencies - but because you repeated it too often, people tune it out as if it’s false when it’s still true. In essence, as if the villagers ignored the boy who cried wolf when in fact there actually had been a wolf every single time.
What’s the way to circumvent/overcome this obstacle and get people to heed a warning regardless of whether it’s the 1st or 500th time?
People don’t tune out warnings due to repetition, they tune out warnings they perceive as false no matter how many times they hear it. ‘Boy cried wolf’ is about someone who lies repeatedly with no benefit to anyone but themselves in a situation where the truth can be perceived even by duh stupid. Picking out the truth in matters of politics and science is not so easy for everybody.
Change fundamental human nature?
Humans are bad at risk assessment. They normalize deviance when catastrophe isn’t striking right now. They ignore warning signs to take selfies with wild animals or stand at the edge of boiling acidic geothermal pools. They deny that the wolf will inevitably attack, even if it’s standing there snarling at you.
If it were possible, the one doing the warning should have eased up on the stridency and frequency of their warning, to hopefully reduce the inurement in the minds of the hearers. But I don’t think anything can help after the point you’re describing until disaster actually strikes.
And then expect to be blamed for the disaster. Ask Cassandra about that.
That’s not what happened in that fable. The boy was not saying something that was true. He was saying false things to get people riled up, to get his jollies because he was bored, and so on.
So people tuned him out because he was a liar.
Then when he actually told the truth, people ignored him because he was a liar
Exactly. This is why the normal “cry wolf” analogy doesn’t work and is misleading. If, instead, you every single day tell the village “a wolf is definitely coming at some point five and seven years from now,” the analogy is closer, and the villagers’ disinterest more comprehensible.
It’s human nature, exactly as stated. If the wolf isn’t chewing on you right now, there is no wolf.
Northern_Piper:
That’s not what happened in that fable. The boy was not saying something that was true. He was saying false things to get people riled up, to get his jollies because he was bored, and so on.
So people tuned him out because he was a liar.
Then when he actually told the truth, people ignored him because he was a liar
Right. I know that. That’s why my thread title said “when there is, in fact, a wolf” - meaning, the opposite of what happened in the fable.
Oftentimes people will tune out a truth-teller for being too repetitive even when it’s truth.
Ok walk us through that fable, but have there actually be a wolf from the beginning.
At a guess I would say the town is big and, while there is a wolf and it may eat someone, the chances it will be me are very low and I do not want to pay more taxes for a city guard to protect against wolves.
“Suppose that Smith and Jones have applied for a certain job. And suppose that Smith has strong evidence for the following conjunctive proposition: (d) Jones is the man who will get the job, and Jones has a wolf in his pocket.”
bump
May 8, 2024, 6:25pm
10
I think a lot of it has to do with the hyperbole around the wolf.
It’s one thing if a kid is saying “I saw a wolf! For real! Out in the back pasture on Tuesday, over on the hill yesterday.” People are liable to believe him, even if they don’t actually do anything about it- it’s maybe not such a huge threat to anyone except the farmer whose livestock is near there.
But if the kid is going around saying there’s a wolf, and that wolf is going to open the locked door and eat their babies while they sleep, or the wolf is going to come in and take a shit in your shoes on the second floor of the building, then people are going to start tuning him out because he’s being hyperbolic and ridiculous, even though there is in fact, a wolf out there somewhere.
Whack-a-Mole:
At a guess I would say the town is big and, while there is a wolf and it may eat someone, the chances it will be me are very low and I do not want to pay more taxes for a city guard to protect against wolves.
Substitute “tsunami” for “wolf” and you get instances like this:
The story has a wolf from the beginning; wolves exist in the universe of the fable - we know this because a wolf turns up and eats the boy; clearly the boy was at some nonzero risk of being eaten by a wolf every day.
I really question this assertion. Yes, people tune out stuff they don’t want to hear, but what evidence is there that they tune out the bad news more, the more often they hear it?
The more likely scenario these days is that a) they start out by ignoring the warning because they don’t want to believe it, or b) they get told by a trusted source that the warning is not valid, and ignore it and make fun of it after that; or c) they seek out further real information and then respond more appropriately. In the last case, they are unlikely to ignore future warnings, they have already figured out that the danger is real. In none of these cases is someone ignoring a warning because they have heard it too often.
I think your premise is flawed.
I don’t feel repetition is the problem. The problem is people actively telling lies against the truth that’s the problem.
The boy sees the wolves and tells the villagers their sheep are in danger.
The wolves then tell the villagers “Are you going to just sit there and listen to this anti-wolf propaganda? Wolves don’t hurt sheep. That’s just anti-wolf racism and you should be ashamed of yourselves for listening to it. We thought you were better than that. All those missing sheep were probably eaten by lions. Lions are the real enemy here. They’re an invasive species form another country. Not good local hometown animals like us wolves that you’re known all your life. And lions are sneaky, which is why you never see them. Not like us wolves, who live out in the open right here near your pastures. And that talk about building fences is crazy talk. Ask yourself why the boy is suddenly so interested in getting fences built. I’m not saying he’s getting a kickback from the lumber yard. I’m just asking questions. What I say is you guys already work hard and the last thing you need is more work. Take a break and stay home. I’m sure the sheep will be fine. You don’t hear the boy saying you should take a day off, do you? Makes you wonder what he has against you shepherds. Easy for him to say you guys should be working more when he doesn’t have to work himself.”
robby
May 8, 2024, 7:10pm
15
Exactly. The article (written in 2007) says this explicitly:
So because most tsunami warnings did not result in any damage, they are (or were) training their populace to ignore them. This obviously can have deadly consequences if there is, in fact, a damaging tsunami.
Subsequently, in the 2011 tsunami :
A Japanese government study found that 58% of people in coastal areas in Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures heeded tsunami warnings immediately after the quake and headed for higher ground. Of those who attempted to evacuate after hearing the warning, only five percent were caught in the tsunami. Of those who did not heed the warning, 49% were hit by the water.
(Another issue was that many people who took shelter on higher ground found that they were, in fact, not high enough for the higher-than-expected tsunami surge.)
I think the problem is that too many people think that hearing about a problem is akin to actually solving that problem. They hear “There’s a wolf!” but before they can process that information and react to it someone shouts out “There’s a bear!”, then another shouts out “There’s a tiger!”. The first person shouts out “There is still a wolf!” and the people respond “Yeah, we heard you and that is old news-We have a bear and a tiger to worry about now!” We get so much troubling news with no time to think and react, that we are overwhelmed and put it on the back burner. Saying “There’s a wolf!” over and over again even if people can actually see that wolf can become counterproductive.
