upworthy
Most Shared

Arguing is easy; persuasion is hard: what Donald Trump teaches us about debate.

An illustrated look at flawed arguments and how to avoid them.

Ask a handful of Donald Trump supporters what first caught their attention about the GOP nominee, and you're bound to hear a few familiar responses — among them, the impression that the business tycoon "tells it like it is."

He's a "straight shooter" who comes off as lively and spontaneous at rallies, on social media, and at debates. He gives off the impression of being a man of the people despite the fact that he lives in a literal gold tower.

What many probably don't notice about Trump's arguments, however, is that they're bad. They're really, really bad.


Photo by Charlie Leight/Getty Images.

When you detach Trump's words from his bluster, what might seem like convincing arguments are actually just highly-rehearsed rhetorical tricks.

Stripped bare, Trump sidesteps having to argue his position by using common rhetorical devices instead. While persuasive (after all, he has millions of supporters), these arguments tend to be without substance and well ... bad.

See, not all arguments are created equal. In fact, some arguments are just plain bad. They use logical fallacies (flaws in thinking) to make a point that may not be true. And that's all the more reason to learn to identify them when you see them.

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images.

By learning to identify these fallacies, you'll be able to improve your own argument skills and — perhaps even better — you'll be better able to identify when someone is trying to use a bad argument on you.

Below are nine examples of bad arguments to keep an eye out for, as illustrated by Donald Trump:

1. The "straw man" argument

A straw man is when you deliberately misrepresent your opponent’s argument to make it easier for you to attack. Straw man arguments are usually deployed as a way of making your opponent seem extreme, making your own argument appear more reasonable by comparison.

“Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the Second Amendment,” Donald Trump said during a rally. “Hillary Clinton wants to take your guns away, and she wants to abolish the Second Amendment!"

Illustrations by Karl Orozco for Upworthy.

The truth is that while Clinton supports a number of gun safety measures — such as background checks and preventing members of the terrorism watch list from purchasing guns — there’s no reason to believe she would support repealing the Second Amendment.

Saying that she wants to abolish the Second Amendment, as Trump did, is a gross simplification of her actual position, and the perfect example of a straw man argument.

2. The ad hominem argument.

Basically, ad hominem is the strategy Donald Trump uses when he calls Marco Rubio “Little Marco,” refers to Hillary Clinton as “Crooked,” or says Elizabeth Warren is “Goofy.” The target of an ad hominem attack is the person you’re arguing against, rather than their ideas.

Look at that face!” Trump said about rival candidate Carly Fiorina in an interview with Rolling Stone in September 2015. "Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?! I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?”

Rather than pushing back on Fiorina’s ideas, experience, or policy proposals, Trump focused on her appearance — something that should be irrelevant in a presidential election.

3. The "appeal to fear" argument.

Tapping into people's heightened emotions is a powerful rhetorical device, and when used in the context of arguments, it can be incredibly persuasive. Fear is an especially potent emotion to tap into during an argument. When we’re afraid, our decision-making skills are impaired; we don’t think clearly, and we don’t look at arguments from a rational perspective.

When Donald Trump says things like, “There is a great hatred toward Americans by a large segments of the Muslim population. It’s gonna get worse and worse. You’re gonna have more World Trade Centers,” he’s appealing to fear.

While there are questions about the facts involved (Is there a “great hatred toward Americans by large segments of the Muslim population”? Are we at risk of more World Trade Center-style attacks? Trump doesn’t provide facts to support either claim), our brains are conditioned to set those aside in favor of doing what he tells us will keep us safe: in this case, voting for Donald Trump.

4. The "personal incredulity" and "appeal to ignorance" arguments.

Leaning heavily on your own disbelief or ignorance on any given subject is a flawed approach to winning an argument. “I can’t believe x, therefore y must be true” makes for a pretty weak argument in most cases — especially when facts are left out of the equation.

“It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably from the Middle East,” Trump said in reference to illegal immigration. “But we don’t know 'cause we have no protection.”

If that sounds like word salad, that’s because it is. Trump’s whole argument rests on information he doesn’t have — and that he knows you don’t have either. When he says “we don’t know,” he really means that he doesn’t know.

5. The "bandwagon" argument.

Also known as appeal to belief, appeal to the masses, appeal to popularity, and other names, the bandwagon fallacy is an argument that rests on the belief that because a lot of people agree on something, it must be correct.

This is another favorite tactic Donald Trump uses during his rallies. “I only wish these cameras — because there is nothing as dishonest as the media, that I can tell you,” he has said. “I only wish these cameras would spin around and show the kind of people that we have here. The numbers of people that we have. I just wish they'd for once do it.”

His boastful argument is meant to suggest that because a lot of people come out to support him at his rallies, or that because he has a lot of Twitter followers, he would be the best president. In truth, while this may (or may not) be a decent predictor of whether he’ll receive a lot of votes, his popularity doesn’t mean that his policy proposals would be any more effective than his opponent’s.

Similarly, Trump has a tendency to appeal to authority (another logical fallacy) in citing his endorsements (such as those of religious leaders, basketball coaches, boxing promoters, and just broadly "many people"), to tie into the bandwagon argument, suggesting that if certain other people support Trump, you should too.

6. The "black and white" argument.

The world is filled with possibilities — that is, until you deploy to the black and white fallacy in an argument. Also known as a false dilemma, false dichotomy, false choice, or bifurcation, the black and white fallacy presents situations as only having two distinct options, when in actuality there are numerous possible outcomes.

“We’re going to start winning so much that you’re going to get used to winning instead of getting used to losing,” Trump said in a campaign video.

In this situation, the listener is being given two options: winning or losing. This quote was delivered in the context of trade deals, but has been used throughout Trump's campaign to contrast himself (a winner) with his opponents (losers). Now, of course, elections have winners and losers, but Trump was speaking in a more general sense that doesn’t necessarily support his argument.

7. The "slippery slope" argument.

Ever hear someone make an argument against something on the basis that if we let that thing happen, it’ll lead to something terrible down the road? That’s called the slippery slope, and it’s a wildly popular argument among politicians. This argument style combines an appeal to fear and a straw man argument, and it uses extreme hypothetical outcomes as evidence for why we should (or shouldn’t) do something.

“You know what’s going to happen,” Trump said during an October 2015 rally. “[Ford is] going to build a plant and illegals are going to drive those cars right over the border. Then they’ll probably end up stealing the car and that’ll be the end of it.”

In that example, Trump argues that if Ford builds a manufacturing plant in Mexico, its cars will be used to transport undocumented immigrants into the U.S. and cause a spike in crime. That’s a bit of a stretch, but it’s also a clear use of the slippery slope fallacy due to the fact that his conclusion (Ford shouldn’t move its plant to Mexico) isn’t even directly related to the argument’s premise (undocumented immigrants will steal cars).

Not to mention, Ford has denied Trump’s allegation that they’re considering a move to Mexico. When an argument rests heavily on the use of the phrase “probably will,” it’s a good sign that you might be listening to a slippery slope argument.

8. The "genetic fallacy" argument.

Also known as the fallacy of virtue or fallacy of origins, the genetic fallacy is an argument based on someone or something’s origin, history, or source. Similar to the composition fallacy — that falsely argues that because some portion of a group is one way, all members of that group are — the genetic fallacy relies on irrelevant stereotypes.

In June 2016, Trump went on CNN to defend statements he made about Gonzalo Curiel, a judge who was overseeing a lawsuit brought against Trump University.

“I have had horrible rulings,” Trump said, arguing for Judge Curiel to recuse himself. “I have been treated very unfairly by this judge. This judge is of Mexican heritage. I’m building a wall, OK?”

Here, Trump used the genetic fallacy argument to suggest that, because Judge Curiel (who was born in Indiana, for what it’s worth) is “of Mexican heritage,” he can’t objectively rule in any case Trump is involved in due to Trump’s plans to build a wall along the U.S./Mexico border.

9. The "anecdote" argument.

Stories are great, and when used correctly in the course of making an argument, they can be the key to persuasion. When used in lieu of hard data, however, anecdotes lose their luster.

To be sure, Donald Trump isn't the only politician to regularly rely on the use of anecdotes to make his points. Where Trump differs, however, is in how he deploys them: often without any data to back up his claim, using phrases like “many people are saying.”

Claims like “Many people are now saying I won South Carolina because of the last debate,” “I beat China all the time,” and “I will be the best by far in fighting terror” aren’t rooted in data, but rather in Trump's own feelings.

In many of Trump’s anecdotes, he combines fallacies, sometimes incorporating bandwagon thinking (“Many people are saying…”) or black and white arguments (“I beat China” implies there is a winner and loser in each trade deal — but there doesn't have to be! International trade doesn't need to be a zero-sum game! — and that if Trump isn’t elected, we’ll "lose" to China).

Fallacy-filled arguments like the ones Donald Trump uses are like candy bars: They taste good, and there’s nothing wrong with eating them, but they’re not exactly packed with nutrients.

The goal of being able to recognize these tactics is to merely be aware when people — especially politicians, presidential candidates, and people in positions of power — are making poorly-formed arguments. Identifying these arguments will give you time to look for facts to support whatever decision you’re making based on their argument and to make sure they aren't getting you to agree with something just because it sounds good.

If a bad argument is still persuasive, is it really a bad argument?

"A persuasive argument is one that does in fact succeed in convincing the audience that the conclusion is at least probably true," writes Eastern Kentucky University's Frank Williams. "Logically bad arguments are sometimes very persuasive!  And logically good arguments can fail to be persuasive!"

Photo by Mark Wallheiser/Getty Images.

In other words, just because something is technically a "bad" argument (for example, any of the above Trump arguments) doesn't mean that it won't be convincing. As Trump's supporter base can tell you, he's plenty convincing — even if his arguments are sometimes lacking in key components, like facts or substance.

Of course, there is something called the fallacy fallacy, which means assuming that because someone’s argument used a fallacy, the point they were making is automatically untrue or incorrect. In other words, just because someone makes a bad argument doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong.

Finally, a good argument consists of two parts: a conclusion (what you’re arguing for) and a premise (what you’re saying to support your conclusion). Good arguments hinge on believable, factual premises and good reasons for accepting the conclusion as true. It’s as simple as that.

Critical thinking skills are essential for making informed decisions.

To think critically is to examine reason, purpose, assumptions, facts, consequences, alternate viewpoints, and personal biases before choosing to take action, whether you’re in the voting booth or just talking to a friend. Hopefully, with the help of these examples of fallacies, it just got a little bit easier.

Justice

Walking Alongside Martu: A journey with one of the world’s oldest living cultures

Pura’s inaugural impact collection honors both sacred traditions and sustainable futures.

James Roh
True

In a world driven by speed, efficiency, and immediate results, it’s easy to forget that lasting change is built on trust. Real impact doesn’t come from rushing toward an end goal or measuring success through lofty metrics. It comes from falling in love with the problem, building a community around it, and sharing a vision for lasting transformation.

Pura, the smart home fragrance company that marries premium fragrance with innovative technology, recently launched its inaugural impact collection with K Farmer Dutjahn Foundation (KFDF) and Dutjahn Sandalwood Oils (DSO). The Pura x Dutjahn partnership began with a clear purpose: to source a sacred ingredient directly from its origin while honoring the land and the people who’ve cared for it. Our goal wasn’t simply to find sandalwood — it was to find a community and an ingredient that embody exceptional land stewardship, ethical harvesting, and transformative, community-led impact. After careful research and over three years of development, we saw an opportunity to secure a premium, luxurious ingredient while supporting a regenerative supply chain that invests in Indigenous-led education, economic opportunity, and land stewardship.

James Roh

Over the past several years, we’ve walked alongside Martu, an Indigenous tribe from the vast Western Australian desert. Martu are one of the oldest living cultures in the world, with a history spanning 60,000 years. As nomadic hunter-gatherers, they have unparalleled ecological knowledge, passed down through generations, making them the traditional custodians of the land. Their approach to sandalwood harvesting isn’t driven by market demand but by a deep respect for seasonal rhythms, land health, and cultural law. Their work adapts to the environment—whether it’s “sorry time,” when mourning pauses activities, or the harsh desert conditions that make travel and communication difficult. Martu operate on Martu time, a deliberate rhythm shaped by millennia of experience, far removed from the rapid-swipe, hyper-productive pace of Western systems.

Martu’s ecological knowledge isn’t documented in baseline reports. It’s lived, carried in stories, and practiced with rigor and respect for the changing needs of the ecosystems. True partnership means unlearning the typical approach. It means standing beside—not in front—and recognizing that the wisdom and leadership we need already exist within these communities. Our role isn’t to define the work, but to support it, protect it, and learn from it.

James Roh

Tonight, as I spoke with Chairman Clinton Farmer and the KFDF team about our focus for this piece, I learned that Clinton’s truck had broken down (again), leaving him to “limp” back to town from the desert at low speeds for hours and hours. He had been awake since 3:00 a.m. This is a common and costly setback, one that disrupts the harvest, demands days of driving, and brings real financial and emotional strain. These barriers are relentless and persistent, part of the harsh reality Clinton and his community face daily. It's easy for outsiders, detached from the reality on the ground, to impose rules, regulations, and demands from afar. Rather than continuing to impose, we need to truly partner with communities — equipping them with the resources to operate sustainably, avoid burnout, and protect the very land they love and care for. All while they endeavor to share these incredible, sacred ingredients with the world and build an economic engine for their people.

There is much to learn, but we are here to listen, adapt, and stay the course. The future we need will not be built in quarterly cycles. It will be built in trust, over time, together.

To learn more about the partnership and fragrances, visit Pura x Dutjahn.

A map of the United States post land-ice melt.

Land ice: We got a lot of it. Considering the two largest ice sheets on earth — the one on Antarctica and the one on Greenland — extend more than 6 million square miles combined ... yeah, we're talkin' a lot of ice. But what if it was all just ... gone? Not like gone gone, but melted?

If all of earth's land ice melted, it would be nothing short of disastrous. And that's putting it lightly. This video by Business Insider Science (seen below) depicts exactly what our coastlines would look like if all the land ice melted. And spoiler alert: It isn't great. Lots of European cities like, Brussels and Venice, would be basically underwater.

I bring up the topic not just for funsies, of course, but because the maps are real possibilities.

How? Climate change.

As we continue to burn fossil fuels for energy and emit carbon into our atmosphere, the planet gets warmer and warmer. And that, ladies and gentlemen, means melted ice.

A study published this past September by researchers in the U.S., U.K., and Germany found that if we don't change our ways, there's definitely enough fossil fuel resources available for us to completely melt the Antarctic ice sheet.

Basically, the self-inflicted disaster you see above is certainly within the realm of possibility.


assets.rebelmouse.io


In Africa and the Middle East? Dakar, Accra, Jeddah — gone.



assets.rebelmouse.io


Millions of people in Asia, in cities like Mumbai, Beijing, and Tokyo, would be uprooted and have to move inland.



assets.rebelmouse.io


South America would say goodbye to cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires.


assets.rebelmouse.io


And in the U.S., we'd watch places like Houston, San Francisco, and New York City — not to mention the entire state of Florida — slowly disappear into the sea.


assets.rebelmouse.io

All GIFs via Business Insider Science/YouTube.

Business Insider based these visuals off National Geographic's estimation that sea levels will rise 216 feet (!) if all of earth's land ice melted into our oceans.

There's even a tool where you can take a detailed look at how your community could be affected by rising seas, for better or worse.

Although ... looking at these maps, it's hard to imagine "for better" is a likely outcome for many of us.

Much of America's most populated regions would be severely affected by rising sea levels, as you'll notice exploring the map, created by Alex Tingle using data provided by NASA.

Take, for instance, the West Coast. (Goodbye, San Fran!)



assets.rebelmouse.io


Or the East Coast. (See ya, Philly!)


assets.rebelmouse.io


And the Gulf Coast. (RIP, Bourbon Street!)

"This would not happen overnight, but the mind-boggling point is that our actions today are changing the face of planet Earth as we know it and will continue to do so for tens of thousands of years to come," said lead author of the study Ricarda Winkelmann, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

If we want to stop this from happening," she says, "we need to keep coal, gas, and oil in the ground."

The good news? Most of our coastlines are still intact! And they can stay that way, too — if we act now.

World leaders are finallystarting to treat climate change like the global crisis that it is — and you can help get the point across to them, too.

Check out Business Insider's video below:


- YouTubewww.youtube.com


This article originally appeared eleven years ago.

The Statue of Liberty has broken shackles at her feet, which people can't really see.

If Americans were asked to describe the Statue of Liberty without looking at it, most of us could probably describe her long robe, the crown on her head, a lighted torch in her right hand and a tablet cradled in her left. Some might remember it's inscribed with the date of the American Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

But there's a significant detail most of us would miss. It's a feature that points to why Lady Liberty was created and gifted to us in the first place. At her feet, where her robe drapes the ground, lay a broken shackle and chains—a symbol of the abolishment of slavery.

statue of liberty, chains, broken shackles, anti-slavery, abolitionThe Statue of Liberty bears broken shackles at her feet.Photo credit: Canva (left), Atsme (right)

Most people see the Statue of Liberty as a symbol of our welcoming immigrants and mistakenly assume that's what she was meant to represent. Indeed, the opening words of Emma Lazarus's poem engraved on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty—"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"—have long evoked images of immigrants arriving on our shores, seeking a better life in The American Dream.

But that plaque wasn't added to the statue until 1903, nearly two decades after the statue was unveiled. The original inspiration for the monument was emancipation, not immigration.

According to a Washington Post interview with historian Edward Berenson, the concept of Lady Liberty originated when French anti-slavery activist—and huge fan of the United States' Constitution—Édouard de Laboulaye organized a meeting of other French abolitionists in Versailles in June 1865, just a few months after the American Civil War ended. "They talked about the idea of creating some kind of commemorative gift that would recognize the importance of the liberation of the slaves," Berenson said.

Laboulaye enlisted a sculptor, Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi, to come up with ideas. One of the first models, circa 1870, had Lady Liberty holding the broken shackles and chains in her left hand. In the final iteration, her left hand wrapped around a tablet instead and the anti-slavery symbolism of the shackle and chain was moved to her feet.

Dr. Joy DeGruy, author of "Post-Traumatic Slave Syndrome: America's Legacy of Enduring Injury and Healing," often shares the story of how the chains were moved and how the shackles have been a neglected piece of Lady Liberty's history, even for those who visited the landmark. As she points out, both the shackles at her feet and the history of why they are there have been "hidden in plain sight."

Writer Robin Wright pondered in The New Yorker what Laboulaye would think of our country today. The America that found itself embroiled in yet another civil rights movement in 2020 because we still can't seem to get the whole "liberty and justice for all" thing down pat. The America that spent the century after slavery enacting laws and policies specifically designed to keep Black Americans down, followed by decades of continued social, economic and political oppression. The America that sometimes does the right thing, but only after tireless activism manages to break through a ton of resistance to changing the racism-infused status quo.

The U.S. has juggled dichotomies and hypocrisies in our national identity from the very beginning. The same founding father who declared "that all men are created equal" enslaved more than 600 human beings in his lifetime. The same people who celebrated religious freedom forced their Christian faith on Native peoples. Our most celebrated history of "liberty" and "freedom" is inseparable from our country's violent subjugation of entire races and ethnicities, and yet we compartmentalize rather than acknowledge that two things can be equally true at the same time.

declaration of independence, founding fathers, u.s. history, american revolutionThe signing of the Declaration of IndependenceJohn Trumbull

Every nation on earth has problematic history, but what makes the U.S. different is that our problematic history is also our proudest history. Our nation was founded during the heyday of the transatlantic slave trade on land that was already occupied. The profound and world-changing document on which our government was built is the same document that was used to legally protect and excuse the enslavement of Black people. The house in which the President of the United States sits today was built partially by enslaved people. The deadliest war we've ever fought was over the "right" to enslave Black people.

The truth is that blatant, violent racism was institutionalized from the very beginning of this country. For most of us, that truth has always been treated as a footnote rather than a feature in our history educations. Until we really reckon with the full truth of our history—which it seems like we are finally starting to do—we won't ever get to see the full measure of what our country could be.

statue of liberty, american history, abolition, u.s. symbolismThe Statue of Liberty symbolizes American freedom and liberty that we're still grappling with.Photo credit: Canva

In some ways, the evolution of the design of the Statue of Liberty—the moving of the broken shackle and chain from her hands to being half hidden beneath her robe, as well as the movement of our perception of her symbolism from abolition to immigration—is representative of how we've chosen to portray ourselves as a nation. We want people to think: Hey, look at our Declaration of Independence! See how we welcome immigrants! We're so great! (Oh, by the way, hereditary, race-based chattel slavery was a thing for longer than emancipation has been on our soil. And then there was the 100 years of Jim Crow. Not to mention how we've broken every promise made to Native Americans. And honestly, we haven't even been that nice to immigrants either). But look, independence and a nod to immigration! We're so great!

The thing is that we can be so great. The foundation of true liberty and justice for all, even with all its cracks, is still there. The vision in our founding documents was truly revolutionary. We just have to decide to actually build the country we claim to have built—one that truly lives up to the values and ideals it professes for all people.

This article first appeared five years ago and has been updated.

Health

Science confirms ‘Move in Silence’ trend might be the smartest way to achieve your goals

“I promise you things always work out better when you keep them to yourself.”

Science confirms ‘Move in Silence’ trend might be the smartest way to achieve your goals.

TikTok's latest viral wisdom is backed by hard data—and it's making people rethink their communication habits. We live in a world of chronic oversharing. We post everything, from the routes we run (including screenshots as proof of all that hard work), to the pale-green iced matcha latte sitting at our desks or a present from a boyfriend (who will be tagged prominently, not secretly off screen). Who knows when, but our brains became wired for sharing: to record, to curate, and to post every second of our lives, then consume that of others to a disturbing degree. So, here's a radical idea: when it comes to goals and plans, try keeping them to yourself. It could be the key to making them a reality.

That's the message behind TikTok's massively popular "Move in Silence" trend, where creators like @noemoneyyy have cracked the contradictory code to success: Instead of broadcasting every big idea or project that runs through your head, if you actually want it to come to fruition, keep your plans to yourself until they're executed. And it's not just a trend; surprisingly, science also supports this muted approach.


"As a former oversharer who used to tell every single friend, every single family member, or a partner everything I was doing, I promise you things always work out better when you keep them to yourself," explains creator @noemoneyyy in a video that's garnered millions of views.

On a different video by @mandanazarfhami, she says, “I don’t care what you’ve got going on in your life: that dream job, that city that you want to move to, that dream person, that dream life, that dream anything. Literally keep it to yourself until it’s done.”

Commentors were quick to agree, with one person writing: “From a young age, I never told anyone my next steps. I also taught my husband and son to keep our private matters to themselves and just do things 💯Not many people like it, but who cares🌝🙌🏼🫶🏼”

Another chimed in, “This concept has changed my life for the better.” Others replied, “100 agree 💕” and “100%🙌🏼people can’t ruin what is silent, show results.”


@mandanazarghami monitoring spirits are a real thing - move in silence and watch how much your life changes #fypシ ♬ Jacob and the Stone - Emile Mosseri


What's going on here

In a study done by New York University, researchers found that people who kept their goals private worked on tasks for an average of 45 minutes, compared to the 33 minutes of work completed by those who announced their plans in advance. The twist? The people who shared their goals expressed feeling closer to finishing, despite doing approximately 25% less work.

NYU psychologist Peter Gollwitzer, who led the research, concluded that "once you've told other people your intentions, it gives you a 'premature sense of completeness.'" He also found that the brain is made up of "identity symbols," which create one's self-image. Interestingly, both action and talking about action create symbols in your brain, so simply speaking about a future plan or something you want to do satisfies that part of your brain. When we make our goals public, especially ones that matter to us and deal with our identity, our ability to achieve said goal is significantly reduced. As the old adage goes, "actions speak louder than words."

Stranger still, in his paper "Does Social Reality Widen the Intention-Behavior Gap," Gollwitzer notes that in order for this phenomenon to happen, one must truly care about their goals. "Ironically, this effect was only found for participants who are very committed to their goal!" PsychologyToday notes. "The lesson learned is that the more passionate you are about your goals, the more secretive you should be about them."

Quiet, silence, peace, shhh, no speaking, secret The more passionate you are about your goals, the more secretive you should be. Photo credit: Canva

Another reason to keep quiet: If you're a beginner trying something new, sharing your plans could potentially open you up to criticism and negative feedback, which could deter you from even starting. At the University of Chicago, professor Ayelet Fishbach conducted studies to determine how positive and negative feedback affects the pursuit of one's goal. According to Atlassian, she and her team found:

  • When positive feedback signals commitment to a goal, it increases motivation.
  • When positive feedback signals progress, it actually decreases motivation.
"One example the researchers give is a math student who gets a good grade on a test. If she perceives it to mean she likes math, she will study harder. If, however, she sees the high score as a sign she is making progress in the class, she may ease up and study less." - Atlassian


@_alliechen I used to be such an open book but now im a lot more reserved on my goals and plans so ppl dont judge #moveinsilence #relateablecontent #girlies #viral #success ♬ suara asli - astrooo🪐

We've all been there: excitedly telling everyone about your grand plans to backpack through Europe, the year you'll finally learn Spanish, or joining the group lesson at the tennis courts you always pass by… only to mysteriously lose all motivation a week later. Turns out, those lovely dopamine bursts that accompany every enthusiastic "That sounds great!" or "You should totally do it!" response might be precisely what's holding you back.

The good news? You don't need to become closed-off and secretive, a hermit on the top of a mountain who's afraid to share any part of themselves with the world. Research suggests that sharing your goals with one or two selected friends who can be trusted to provide meaningful support is still a good idea. Just hold off on the Instagram Live announcement until you've actually accomplished something substantial.

So, the next time you sit down to write your goals, whether they be a new year's resolution, the day's to-do list, or a five-year plan, think twice about sharing it with others. Give it time and you might have something better to share soon: the results.

Students at a protest.

Each year that I teach the book "1984," I turn my classroom into a totalitarian regime under the guise of the "common good." I run a simulation in which I become a dictator. I tell my students that in order to battle "Senioritis," the teachers and admin have adapted an evidence-based strategy, a strategy that has "been implemented in many schools throughout the country and has had immense success." I hang posters with motivational quotes and falsified statistics, and provide a false narrative for the problem that is "Senioritis."

"1984" is a book by George Orwell, written in 1949, about a fictional future where a totalitarian regime watches over everyone, rewrites history, and controls what people think. The film's protagonist, Winston Smith, quietly rebels against the regime in an attempt to regain hope, freedom, and truth. It has become essential reading for students worldwide as a blueprint for recognizing the tactics used by authoritarians.

I tell the students that in order to help them succeed, I must implement strict classroom rules. They must raise their hand before doing anything at all, even when asking another student for a pencil. They lose points each time they don't behave as expected. They gain points by reporting other students. If someone breaks the rule and I don't see it, it's the responsibility of the other students to let me know. Those students earn bonus points. I tell students that in order for this plan to work they must "trust the process and not question their teachers." This becomes a school-wide effort. The other teachers and admin join in.

senioritis, fascism, authoritarianism, danger sign, experaments, Senioritis is dangerous for everyone.Photo by Diana Leygerman used with permission

I've done this experiment numerous times, and each year I have similar results. This year, however, was different.

This year, a handful of students did fall in line as always. The majority of students, however, rebelled.

By day two of the simulation, the students were contacting members of administration, writing letters, and creating protest posters. They were organizing against me and against the admin. They were stomping the hallways, refusing to do as they were told.

The president of the Student Government Association, whom I don't even teach, wrote an email demanding an end to this "program." He wrote that this program is "simply fascism at its worst. Statements such as these are the base of a dictatorship rule, this school, as well as this country cannot and will not fall prey to these totalitarian behaviors."

I did everything in my power to fight their rebellion.

fascism, authoritarianism, danger sign, experaments, see something, say something, 1984If you see something, say something.Photo by Diana Leygerman used with permission

I "bribed" the president of the SGA. I "forced" him to publicly "resign." And, yet, the students did not back down. They fought even harder. They were more vigilant. They became more organized. They found a new leader. They were more than ready to fight. They knew they would win in numbers.

I ended the experiment two days earlier than I had planned because their rebellion was so strong and overwhelming. For the first time since I've done this experiment, the students "won."

What I learned is this: Teenagers will be the ones to save us.

1984, george orwell, 1984 mural, ice cream, barcelona, spain, literatureYoung folks enjoying some ice cream outside of a George Orwell mural. via Adam Jones/Wikimedia Commons

Just like Emma Gonzalez, the teen activist from Marjory Stoneman Douglas, my students did not back down nor conform. They fought for their rights. They won.

Adults can learn a lot from the teens of this generation. Adults are complacent, jaded, and disparaged. Teenagers are ignited, spirited, and take no prisoners. Do not squander their fight. They really are our future. Do not call them entitled. That entitlement is their drive and their passion. Do not get in their way. They will crush you.

Foster their rebellion. They are our best allies.

This story originally appeared on Medium and is reprinted here with permission. It was originally published seven years ago.

Internet

Nail-biting video shows a woman as she realizes a creepy man is following her

She was only halfway through her run when the man's behavior forced her to stop.

@lacie_kraatz/TikTok
Lacie films as the mysterious man visibly gets closer.

It’s no secret that even the most seemingly safe of public places can instantly turn dangerous for a woman. Is it fair? No. But is it common? Absolutely, to the point where more and more women are documenting moments of being stalked or harassed as a grim reminder to be aware of one’s surroundings.

One of the most common and frightening experiences many women can relate to is being followed by a strange man. It's scary because it's difficult to tell the difference between a random passerby who just happens to be walking in your direction and someone who has malicious intentions. At least, at first. But sadly, most women have learned how to pick up on the clues.

Lacie (@lacie_kraatz) is one of those women. On April 11th, she was out on a run when she noticed a man in front of her displaying suspicious behavior.


stalking, harassment, women, girls, men, danger, safetySadly, creeps don't need the cover of darkness to be creeps. Photo by ølı on Unsplash

Things got especially dicey when the man somehow got behind her. That’s when she pulled out her phone and started filming—partially to prove that it wasn’t just her imagination, and also out of fear for her safety.

“Hello. I’m just making this video so that women are a little more aware of them,” she begins in the video. “See this gentleman behind me? Yeah, this is what this video’s about.”

According to Lacie, the two were initially running in opposite directions. But at some point after seeing her, the man stopped in the middle of the trail and waited for her to pass so that he could follow her path from behind.

“Now, I know what you’re thinking—‘Why are you suspecting that he’s following you?'” Lacie continues. “Well, let me tell you. I was just walking like this, and I look up, and he’s in front of me, and he just keeps doing a ‘peek’ like this behind him, over and over again.”

Lacie added that at one point, she even made an illegal crossing when “do not walk” sign was still up in an attempt to put some distance between herself and the man. After looking over her shoulder, she noticed that the man was visibly “speeding” to keep up.

In case there is still any doubt, Lacie then begins to run to see if the man will follow suit. Sure enough, he does.

Luckily the man eventually seems to give up, though he still seems to be watching her from a distance. Lacie ends up safe back home, but she didn't even accomplish what she set out to do that afternoon.

“I couldn’t even finish my run,” she concludes. “I only ran like a mile and a half. I wanted to do 3 miles, but no—creepy men just had to be creepy f****** men today.”

Watch the harrowing encounter here:

@lacie_kraatz

#foryou #ladies #awareness

Countless women empathized with Lacie in the comments section. Clearly, this was not a unique circumstance.

“What I do when I’m being followed is act feral,” yet another person shared. “Like I’ll bark and growl really loud and flail my arms around. If you look crazy, you're doin' it right.”

Another added, “Man, nothing pisses me off more than men who make me feel uncomfortable doing things that I NEED to do for my health and well-being.”

Others tried to give their own tips for handling the situation, from finding nearby police or fire stations to using a variety of running trails to simply notifying the first visible passerby of what’s happening and asking to stand with them.

And of course, the resounding advice was to use the public space, and modern-day technology, to one’s advantage.

As one person wrote, “Girls we have got to normalize turning around and yelling at people following us. Let them know you know, take pictures of them, scream, make a scene."

Experts say the most important thing is to stay in a populated area as long as you're being followed. If you can pop into a store, do it. And always let a trusted friend or loved one know where you are. Giving a family member access to Find My Phone or a similar tracking app could be a lifesaver.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

It’d be nice if these kinds of unsettling interactions didn’t exist. But here we are.

Some estimates say around 75% of women have been followed by a stranger at some point in their lives; a shocking, tragic statistic. They're also around four times as likely to be continuously stalked compared to men. It's not fair that women and girls have to deal with this, and that they're forced to develop a keep instinct for when danger is present.

At the very least, it’s good that women are speaking up more so that these situations are easier to spot early on and women can know how to navigate them in the safest way possible.

And as for Lacie, she went on to join the US Coast Guard and regularly posts updates about her life in the military. Safe to say she has no problem taking care of herself these days.

This article originally appeared two years ago. It has been updated.