I think Japanese services are built on the 'presumption of good faith,' but what is the reason for the increase in people who don't know their limits (manners)?

Yes, the background behind why Japanese service culture has been built on the presumption of good faith, and the reasons why that is wavering, are complex. I will explain them in an organized manner.

1. Traditional Background

In Japan, the idea that 'the customer is god' and a culture that values group harmony have been deeply rooted for a long time. Therefore, service providers have basically trusted their customers and operated by relying on implicit rules and manners.

This is a typical application of the presumption of good faith, where services were designed under the assumption that 'the majority of people will follow common sense.'

2. Factors of Change

The reason why you feel that there are more people who don't know their limits recently is due to a combination of the following reasons.

• Anonymity and Internet Culture
  On SNS and internet bulletin boards, it has become possible to act in ways detached from real-world rules, making it easier for lack of common sense and excessive demands to surface.

• Rising Consumer Rights Awareness
  When the consciousness that 'services exist for me' becomes stronger, demands can naturally escalate as a matter of course.

• Weakening of Social Restraint
  Due to the dilution of local communities and the expansion of individualism, the power to suppress behavior by being conscious of others' eyes is weakening.

• Impact of Economic and Information Disparities
  In a highly competitive environment with diversified services, the psychology of customers wanting to 'gain more' becomes stronger, making it easier for behavior that ignores rules to increase.

3. Conclusion

In other words, the 'culture built on the presumption of good faith' was supported by the implicit rules of the group and mutual trust. However, due to the progress of internet society, individualism, and rising rights awareness, behavior that does not know its limits is becoming more noticeable.

Yes, 'rising rights awareness' simply means that more people think, 'I have the right to receive more benefits or better treatment for services and products.' I will organize the background in a little more detail.

1. Penetration of Laws and Systems

With the development of laws and systems such as the Consumer Contract Act, the cooling-off system, and the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations, the feeling that 'it is natural to assert and protect one's rights' has spread.

In the past, there was a strong culture of accepting what shops and companies said to a certain extent, but today, the perception that 'if you are not satisfied, it is okay to complain' and 'it is natural to demand compensation' has become established.

2. Increase in information access

You can easily see examples of other people's success stories and how they handled complaints on the internet and social media.

For example, when you see information such as 'I complained at this shop and got a refund' or 'I demanded this kind of service and received it,' it becomes easier to think that you should demand the same thing. This is a factor that lowers the psychological hurdle for rights consciousness.

3. Penetration of individualism

In modern society, the value of 'prioritizing one's own desires and interests' has become stronger.
The tendency to prioritize 'one's own satisfaction' over the harmony of the group or society as a whole leads to excessive demands on services.

4. Consumer education and media

Media and advertisements also sometimes send out messages that 'consumers should not lose out' and 'services are there for you.' By being exposed to such information, more people think that 'it is natural to assert one's rights.'

In short, the 'rise in rights consciousness' is a phenomenon that occurs spontaneously as a result of the overlapping of multiple factors such as law, information, individualism, and media.

You are absolutely right. A rise in rights consciousness and excessive demands are not the same thing. Let me organize this and explain.

1. Rise in rights consciousness

• Meaning: Recognizing that you have certain rights. The psychology of thinking 'it is natural to have this done' based on laws and social norms.

• Characteristics: Assertions and demands within the scope of rights. Often rational and socially accepted.

Example: Inquiring because the ordered product did not arrive, or requesting a refund because the service received was different from the explanation.

2. Excessive demands

• Meaning: Making demands that exceed one's rights and ignore common sense or the service provider's capabilities.

• Characteristics: Includes unreasonable demands or claims that are socially unacceptable.

Examples: Demanding a full refund for a minor stain, or ignoring others' circumstances and rules to demand special treatment.

3. The relationship between the two

• Having a high sense of rights is a normal psychological state and is necessary for society.

• However, if the sense of rights is too strong, or if there are people who misunderstand that 'my rights mean I can demand anything,' it leads to excessive demands.

• In other words, the rise in rights consciousness is the foundation, and excessive demands are biased behaviors that arise on top of that foundation.

In summary, 'the rise in rights consciousness is a healthy phenomenon, but excessive demands appear due to a lack of understanding or self-centered interpretations.'

Yes. I will organize my thoughts and answer.

Background behind the increase in 'lack of understanding or self-centered interpretation'

1. The influence of information overload and SNS culture

   • On the internet and social media, it has become easy to see other people's experiences and 'success stories of asserting rights.'

   • People who see this are more likely to misunderstand and think, 'I can make the same demands.'

   • There is a growing tendency to refer only to superficial success stories without deeply considering the circumstances or context of others.

2. Orientation toward immediacy and short-term satisfaction

   • We live in an era where demands and complaints reach us instantly via smartphones and online services.

   • There is less waiting and understanding, making it easier to perceive 'rights' as 'things that should be fulfilled immediately.'

3. Changes in social and educational backgrounds

   • While education on rights and self-assertion has become widespread, education on the 'importance of responsibility and cooperation with others' can sometimes be weakened.

   • Even if there is an understanding of rights, a lack of understanding of obligations and limitsleads to self-centered interpretations.

4. Anonymity and the dilution of responsibility

   • In environments where you cannot see faces directly, such as on the internet or over the phone, reactions and sanctions feel lenient.

   • The psychology of thinking 'there is no penalty for making strong demands' comes into play, making it easier to lead to excessive demands.

Summary

The rise in rights awareness itself is healthy, but changes in the information environment, a culture of immediacy, biased education, and the dilution of responsibility due to anonymityhave overlapped, leading to an increase in 'lack of understanding and self-centered interpretations.' In other words, this is a phenomenon heavily influenced by social environmental factors, rather than just individual personality.

Yes. I will carefully organize and explain this for you.

The psychological background behind not feeling embarrassed

1. Anonymity and invisible environments

   • In environments where you cannot see the other person, such as on the internet or over the phone, it is difficult to grasp how your actions appear to others.

   • The feeling that 'no one is watching me directly' reduces feelings of embarrassment or guilt.

2. Dilution of empathy

   • When the ability to imagine another person's perspective (empathy) does not function sufficiently, the awareness that you are hurting someone else becomes thin.

   • Especially in online environments, because emotional nuances are difficult to convey through text-only interactions, the psychological distance widens.

3. Influence of culture and education

   • When there is an educational or social trend that emphasizes that 'it is natural to assert your rights,' it becomes easy to mistakenly believe that behavior prioritizing self-assertion is not embarrassing.

   • If the sense of valuing obligations and harmony with others is weak, it becomes difficult to objectively judge the social evaluation of one's actions.

4. Justification of behavior

   • By attaching logic or rights to one's demands or actions, it becomes easier to psychologically feel that one is 'doing the right thing.'

   • This suppresses feelings of shame or regret.

5. Experience and habituation

   • If there is a past experience where the same behavior did not cause a problem, the psychological brake becomes weaker.

   • The sense that 'there is no need to feel embarrassed' is gradually reinforced.

In summary, anonymity, dilution of empathy, cultural background, self-justification, and habituation through experience overlap, making it difficult for a sense of shame to emerge.

Yes, that is a possibility. I will explain in detail.

Background when parents and teachers are at the same level and cannot educate

1. Changes in the social environment

   • Compared to the past, the amount of information in society as a whole has become enormous, and values regarding rights consciousness and individual assertion have also become more complex.

   • Even if parents and teachers provide guidance based only on the common sense and experiences of their own youth, it may not be sufficiently applicable to modern children and students.

2. The issue of the parents' own sense of entitlement and values

   • When parents themselves become accustomed to excessive demands and self-centered behavior, the standards for teaching children what is 'embarrassing' or 'what should be refrained from' become ambiguous.

   • As a result, it becomes difficult for children to develop a sense that 'there is a problem with my behavior.'

3. The limitations of teachers

   • Teachers are also busy and may not be able to sufficiently address the differences in individual students' values and sense of rights.

   • Furthermore, if a teacher's own judgment of 'what should be done' is based on past experience, they may not be able to adapt to the modern internet society and changes in the sense of rights.

4. Lack of educational means

   • If there are few opportunities in school or home education to systematically teach the 'balance between rights and obligations' and 'empathy for others,' the effects will be limited no matter how conscious parents or teachers are.

In other words, parents and teachers are not necessarily able to provide the optimal education for modern children, and their values and sensibilities may be close to the same level as the children's. As a result, there is a tendency for children to find it difficult to acquire a sense of shame or social restraint.

Yes, that is correct. I will organize this in a little more detail.

Prospects for future changes in Japanese society and services

1. The decline of Japanese-style 'presumption of good faith' services

   • In the past, services in Japan were built on the premise that customers and users would act in good faith and follow common sense.

   • Moving forward, because the cost of dealing with a small number of people who 'do not know their limits' will increase, services with high degrees of freedom based on the presumption of good faith will likely be reduced or discontinued.

   • Example: Services that rely on self-judgment, such as unmanned book sales or vegetable stands where you leave cash, may decrease.

2. A shift toward service design based on the presumption of bad faith

   • Services that 'incorporate safety measures assuming malice or misuse' will increase.

   • Example: Electronic money, automated payment machines, systems requiring identity verification, and purchase limit settings.

   • While the degree of freedom for users will decrease, the prevention of damage and the assurance of safety will be prioritized.

3. Changes in the awareness of rules throughout society

   • Amidst an increase in rights-consciousness and self-centered interpretations, government and companies tend to strengthen restrictions and regulations to guarantee that 'anyone can use them with peace of mind.'

   • As a result, the flexibility and convenience of services will decrease, and efficiency and safety will be prioritized.

In other words, it is not just that 'Japanese-style kindness and high-freedom services' will disappear, but that we are moving into an era where service design and rules for society as a whole will be based on the assumption of bad faith rather than good faith.

[PR] Japan Eaten Away by the Assumption of Good Faith: Strategies to Avoid Being Killed by Information

AI-generated, for reference only.