Question

...
David Blomstrom

Is there a fallacy that exploits the need to feel needed?

I'm reading a book about mind control that talks about "seven hidden addictions" that were introduced by Blair Warden in his book The Forbidden Keys to Persuasion .

I thought it would be interesting to see if I could match each of them with a fallacy, preferably one that exploits that "addiction" or bias. So far, I've found two matches - #2 and #3.

Asking for matches for the other five in one post might be overwhelming. However, I am posting the entire list, just to put the whole thing in perspective. If anyone wants to suggest matches for all of them, that's fine. But if you prefer that I take it one item at a time, then let's dedicate this particular question to #1 - the need to be needed. Actually, it looks pretty similar to #4, the need to be noticed and feel understood. If there's a fallacy that covers both of them, awesome. Otherwise, I'll focus on #1.

Thanks!

The Seven "Hidden Addictions"
#1 The need to be needed:
#2 The need for hope when an impasse occurs: Wishful Thinking -- www.logicallyfallacious.c. . .
#3 The need for a scapegoat: Scapegoating -- www.logicallyfallacious.c. . .
#4 The need to be noticed and feel understood:
#5 The need to know things you don't or shouldn't know (i.e. secrets):
#6 The need to be right:
#7 The need to feel a sense of power (e.g. to be in control):
asked on Sunday, May 20, 2018 11:04:04 AM by David Blomstrom

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0

There have been researchers in the last century who looked at human needs and wants, who have attempted to classify these needs. Perhaps the most famous is Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Others that have scientific support are Manfred Max-Neef's and Marty Seligman's well-being theory. Even Anthony Robbins has his own list of six. The reason I mention this, is because that list of seven looks kind of arbitrary and not what I am used to seeing with psychological science. I think if you started with Max-Neef's list, you could better see how others use these needs for exploitation, then match fallacies to these needs. I would also suggest looking at cognitive biases and matching those to the list, as well.

But to answer you question (finally), I don't know of an fallacy that exploits the need to be needed.

answered on Sunday, May 20, 2018 02:09:18 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments