Conclusion
Cialdini calls attention to one of the fundamental themes of this book: very often, we assess things in a very superficial way. We do not invest time in gathering all the relevant information, but instead have a knee-jerk reaction to one thing that we notice and make our decision, paying attention only to details that support that superficial decision - and in some instances, assuming or fabricating things to support it. And this is the cause of our most stupid mistakes, and a tendency that can be easily exploited.
We are generally well aware of the value of taking time to make a decision, but only invest that time in decisions that we feel are particularly important. For most of our lives, we take mental shortcuts to make a quick decision without investing time or effort. And again, mental shortcuts are usually good things that save us investing more mental effort than a decision is worth. They are only a problem when the information we are presented to act upon is falsified, rigged by someone untrustworthy to lead us to make a decision that is in their interests and contrary to our own.
Every weapon of influence counts upon our predilection for taking these mental shortcuts. Call it instinct or reflex, we react in predictable ways to certain stimuli - and influence professionals learn what those stimuli are, how people can be counted upon to respond, and how they can profit from it.
And so it follows that the defense against manipulative individuals is to recognize the stimuli that lead us to take these mental shortcuts, and to make a habit of pausing when we notice these things instead of acting in the way we are naturally, and mindlessly, inclined. In particular, we can recognize that these weapons are most powerful when we are in a vulnerable state: rushed, stressed, uncertain, distracted, or fatigued and learn to activate our detection algorithms when a person approaches us with a proposal when we are in these mental states.
There's rather a long passage about the increasing speed and chaos in society, which means that the amount of information we receive on a daily basis is much more than it was a decade ago, and will be even more a decade in the future, and will likely not slow down during the present era. This means that we will be making a lot more decisions, a lot more quickly. And this means we will become increasingly vulnerable to individuals who take advantage of our mental shortcuts. We will need an aggressive defense system to detect and avoid their attacks.
He also notes that manipulative people aren't necessarily dishonest. They merely provide information that is designed to triggering a predictable reaction. It is not a lie for an advertiser to tell us that a given toothpaste is the most popular brand (social proof) or is a brand that dentists recommend (authority) and that they will give us a free sample (reciprocation) and a coupon good for a discount if we purchase in thirty days (scarcity).
But by presenting that information, they are counting on us to take a mental shortcut, ignoring all other brands to purchase theirs. And it may not be harmful to do so - a toothpaste that is highly recommended by dentists and used by a large number of people is probably a good choice. But from a perspective of decision-making, we have not done the necessary work to validate that: we've merely reacted to a piece of information without considering whether it is really true, or whether there might be a better alternative. But because toothpaste is an inexpensive and unimportant item, we may take the mental shortcut of acting on what we are told without thinking about it.
But on the other hand, some manipulative people are entirely dishonest, and in situations where allowing them to play with our psychological tendencies will cost us a great deal more than the price of a tube of toothpaste. Whether it's the car salesman who is looking to fast-talk us into making a purchase that will cost us thousands of dollars or the con artist who is trying to swindle us into giving them our life savings, these compliance practitioners give us false pretenses, like bad input that causes a computer to malfunction.
It is not necessary to be pugnacious and vindictive with such people. This is a waste of your energy and thoroughly unnecessary. The best weapon you have, and the best practice, is simply to walk away from the "deal" they are offering you. If your aim is to save yourself the mental energy of making a well-considered decision, then saying "no" instead of "yes" is just as effective. In fact, it's better still because it saves you not only the work of thinking, but the time of paying attention to a string of ploys and appeals that manipulative people make when they are attempting to get you to do something for them.
Given the speed and chaos of daily life, time and mental energy is more valuable than ever before. It is therefore all the more important to avoid wasting either on manipulative people.