In this post we’re going straight to the meat! Prototype of charisma model elements.
If we wanted to call a specific communication model a “charisma” it should meet several conditions. To do that we must state what charisma does exactly in order to be considered as charisma, so then we could make (falsifiable) assumptions of how it does those things. Easiest way to state those things is to go from the top to bottom, from the most general idea to the most specific one. As you can see, charisma model is surely a very specific one. Good starting point in our little deduction would be a charismatic leadership. Long story short it is a non-rational leadership where leader is using more specific idea of charismatic authority (non-rational authority) to make followers do what they wouldn’t do otherwise (if not “asked” by the leader). Charismatic leadership is then an act of effective use of ones charismatic authority recognized by followers. Charismatic authority is then a relation between leader and followers of authority recognition based on non-rational premises. Charisma model of communication then is how leader persuaded followers to recognize his authority over them. And to recognize in this sense could also mean subliminal recognition. Hence for charisma to be a charisma it has to almost “hypnotize” followers. But we can’t really use word hypnotize, because this phenomena is still tested and wildly debated. It would be stupid of me to introduce new perspective through creating a metaphor with another unproven phenomena in it.
Charisma as communication model generating social hypnosis maybe isn’t the greatest/most accurate metaphor, but as a broad context it is hard to find a better one. Especially when you take a look at this. Under the link there is an abstract of T. Egner, G. Jamieson and J.Gruzeriel article: “Hypnosis decouples cognitive control from conflict monitoring processes of the frontal lobe”. Title says it all – this is basically what we need to do in order to acquire a non-rational authority. We need to reach emotional, decisive, limbic system with our message, induce values and norms and then rationalize them for the followers. We have to go “under the rational radar” (if I’m using this phrase properly).
This is really a prototype of my perspective on charisma and (maybe) ultimately on whole authority itself. We reached my ¾ page (arbitrarily stated) limit, so the rest of the abstract of this idea will be up tomorrow. Discussion on this one is especially encouraged. Any critique, points, or questions will be appreciated.
Take care, and see you tomorrow
– Przemek Kucia aka That Polish Guy All Dressed Up As Political Scientist LoL
P.S. If you want to know how modern charisma looks like watch this carefully: