4 ms·
What's interesting to me is the following result: Say you're in a situation with two people, where one is making a statement—it might be true, it might be fals
by carsongross 11y ago
What's interesting to me is the following result:
Say you're in a situation with two people, where one is making a statement—it might be true, it might be false—and the other person is trying to determine if that person is lying. The likelihood that you're going to make the right choice is around 54 percent —just above what you'd get if you guessed randomly
What strikes me is that being successfully lied to would appear to be a huge evolutionary disadvantage for the individual. One would think that humans would have immensely attuned bullshit detectors, but that doesn't appear to be the case: we instead appear to be built to trust, at least most of us.
One can easily construct arguments why this is: for example, smaller groups with high trust can specialize with much lower risk. But one wonders if, in modern society, this leads to the "idiots lead by sociopaths" situations we so often find ourselves in.
- emodendroket 11y agoBeing able to lie successfully also confers an evolutionary advantage and there are almost no outward indicators most people are lying. Why would you expect any different? What's really troubling is various "systems" offered to law enforcement and so on that do not actually make people more accurate at discerning lies but do make them much more confident in their ability to do so.
- carsongross 11y agoBecause the majority of people are terrible liars, is why.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- emodendroket 11y agoMaybe you should go teach the researchers who are barely beating chance at identifying lies if you're so good at it.