Pro-social behavior and bullshit - some numbers are in

iceaura

Valued Senior Member
One of the minor mysteries of life is the common observation that assholes get conned more easily than average. They drive on average overpriced, unreliable cars, for example. They buy into pyramid schemes. They hire crooked lawyers, their employees embezzle from them, they marry golddiggers and social climbers who betray them, they vote for Republicans.

Assholes tend to be patsies. Why? It's possible, say, that getting ripped off all the time might make someone less agreeable, less kind, less inclined to pleasantries. It's possible that the focus on superficialities of status and gain might lead to easier manipulation by the clever.

And it's possible that some deficit of mental capability leads to both - an inability to see the big picture or mirror other people's perspectives, say, preventing one from acting accordingly.

That last fits these results:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201474
Despite bullshit-receptivity and profoundness-receptivity being positively correlated with each other, logistic regression analyses showed that profoundness-receptivity had a positive association whereas bullshit-receptivity had a negative association with both types of prosocial behavior. These relations held up for the most part when controlling for potentially intermediating factors such as cognitive ability, time spent completing the survey, sex, age, level of education, and religiosity.
 
And it too has been studied, analyzed, researched. It was easily employed in the fairly rigorous study mentioned.

I don't know. Is this politics or science?

I mean, are you interested in the "science" or just voicing an opinion?

:EDIT:

I'd like not to consider myself an asshole, but there are times I've easily been conned.
 
I don't know. Is this politics or science?

I mean, are you interested in the "science" or just voicing an opinion?
I thought the study was interesting. It's obviously small, uncertain, and typically arguable in various ways (typically for young field studies). But it's carefully done as far as it goes, and perhaps a bit counterintuitive in its results (would you have guessed that relationship?). What's not to like?

Its relationship to whatever you are thinking of as my "opinion" - that assholes are more gullible, on average? that antisocial and asshole significantly overlap as categories? - would be a separate matter overall.
It reads as a cross between an onion article and a SCIgen production.
It lacks their characteristic features - exaggerated claims, lack of analytical rigor, incomprehensible and meaningless phrases, political framing, buzzword stuffing, etc.
How'd you spot it?
 
And you never noticed it for yourself?
Lots of people have.
It's an interesting research study, in any case.
No. I'd have kind of guessed the opposite.

Maybe this is one of those rare cases where the universe actually punishes the right people.

*not that I believe in karma
 
On the other hand, a well-known phrase is: you can't con an honest man.

Rule 1 of the con artist is: look for the kind of mark that thinks they might get something for nothing. That's how you hook them.
 
They're called "antisocial", and there's more research on them than on the prosocial.
Another interesting aspect of that study.

the false anti-christ of that which defys the facist...

i have heard from varying inside sources that the vast majority of con artistry victims are christian weekly-type semi conservative church goers.
which probably correltates quite well.
though... managing to equalise the cross validation values of social modality libiralism behavioural practice is probably quite tricky.
this also panders to ultra conservatives whcih then lends to increase the extremity of the vualnerability.
 
Back
Top