That's incredibly meaningless, because if you put someone in someone else's shoes, that means you are giving them the same genetics and life experience that cau

That's incredibly meaningless, because if you put someone in someone else's shoes, that means you are giving them the same genetics and life experience that caused them to become a jerk, optimist, etc. The paper doesn't have any insight. It would have an insight if they took people's souls and gave them hundreds of lives with different genetics, socioeconomic backgrounds, parents, and friend groups, and measured the impact that each had on how likely someone was to become a jerk, optimist, etc. "Individuals have mildly consistent behaviors" is the only observation the paper makes, and it isn't particularly interesting.