4 ms·

"Smart people are no more resistant to it than anyone else" Absolute statements are very rarely correct.

Dylan16807 4y ago
It's a statistical statement, so it's very easy for it to be correct. A subgroup is either more X, less X, the same X to the limits of testing, or has too complicated a relation with X to fit into the above. The only "absolute" aspects are things like the median and deviation. No positions are being pushed to the extreme. Even better, "no more" covers both "less" and "same", so it's even easier for a statement like that to be correct.
- CoastalCoder 4y ago
  I agree with your main point. Is the term "smart people" sufficiently vague that it would need refinement for the level of certainty you're describing?
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    I don't feel like it does. The more vague you make a category, the easier it is to say it's the same as the general population.
- SapporoChris 4y ago
  This is how I interpret the statement: "Smart people are no more resistant to it than anyone else". 'it' = being conned. 'anyone' does include the dumbest people in the world, so, "Smart people are no more resistant to being conned than the dumbest people in the world" which is enough in my opinion to falsify the absolute statement.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    I understand that interpretation but I think "anyone else" is supposed to stand in for an everyman, not the most connable person you can find.
    - SapporoChris 4y ago
      Thank you for your explanation.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
JohnFen 4y ago
There is a huge amount of data, going back at least a hundred years, that backs my statement up. But just to be very clear, I'm speaking statistically. You might be the exception to this (but I wouldn't bet on it). The reason smart people are no more resistant to being conned than anybody else is because conning people is an emotional approach, not an intellectual one. Any given specific con may not be one that will sucker everybody (in fact, it certainly won't), but con artists tailor their cons to their target. The one a smart person will fall for is different than the one a dumb person will fall for. As Brian Brushwood says in his excellent podcast "The World's Greatest Con"... "We don't get conned because we're stupid. We get conned because we're human."

It's a statistical statement, so it's very easy for it to be correct. A subgroup is either more X, less X, the same X to the limits of testing, or has too complicated a relation with X to fit into the above. The only "absolute" aspects are things like the median and deviation. No positions are being pushed to the extreme. Even better, "no more" covers both "less" and "same", so it's even easier for a statement like that to be correct.

CoastalCoder 4y ago
I agree with your main point. Is the term "smart people" sufficiently vague that it would need refinement for the level of certainty you're describing?
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  I don't feel like it does. The more vague you make a category, the easier it is to say it's the same as the general population.
SapporoChris 4y ago
This is how I interpret the statement: "Smart people are no more resistant to it than anyone else". 'it' = being conned. 'anyone' does include the dumbest people in the world, so, "Smart people are no more resistant to being conned than the dumbest people in the world" which is enough in my opinion to falsify the absolute statement.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  I understand that interpretation but I think "anyone else" is supposed to stand in for an everyman, not the most connable person you can find.
  - SapporoChris 4y ago
    Thank you for your explanation.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

JohnFen 4y ago

There is a huge amount of data, going back at least a hundred years, that backs my statement up. But just to be very clear, I'm speaking statistically. You might be the exception to this (but I wouldn't bet on it). The reason smart people are no more resistant to being conned than anybody else is because conning people is an emotional approach, not an intellectual one. Any given specific con may not be one that will sucker everybody (in fact, it certainly won't), but con artists tailor their cons to their target. The one a smart person will fall for is different than the one a dumb person will fall for. As Brian Brushwood says in his excellent podcast "The World's Greatest Con"... "We don't get conned because we're stupid. We get conned because we're human."