Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday April 01 2017, @12:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the I'll-tell-you-tomorrow dept.

Gullibility occurs because we have evolved to deal with information using two fundamentally different systems, according to Nobel Prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman.

System 1 thinking is fast, automatic, intuitive, uncritical and promotes accepting anecdotal and personal information as true. This was a useful and adaptive processing strategy in our ancestral environment of small, face-to-face groups, where trust was based on life-long relationships. However, this kind of thinking can be dangerous in the anonymous online world.

System 2 thinking is a much more recent human achievement; it is slow, analytical, rational and effortful, and leads to the thorough evaluation of incoming information.

While all humans use both intuitive and analytic thinking, system 2 thinking is the method of science, and is the best available antidote to gullibility. So, education tends to reduce gullibility and those who receive scientific training in critical, sceptical thinking also tend to be less gullible and less easily manipulated.

Differences in trust can also influence gullibility. This may be related to early childhood experiences, with the idea that trust in infancy sets the stage for a lifelong expectation the world will be a good and pleasant place to live.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:20AM (4 children)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:20AM (#487415) Homepage

    Pretty sure I've said it before on SoylentNews, so I'll say it here on Slashdot since I'm no longer banned: Gullibility is a quick litmus test used by salesmen, intelligence agents, and other exploiters of people alike to quickly assess how easily the mark can be manipulated.

    The canonical example is saying a falsehood with a straight face and seeing how the mark reacts. If they don't call bullshit or give off uncomfortable body language, you keep going. If they do, you laugh and admit to joking and probe for weaknesses using other methods.

    The huge problem admitted in the summary is that the "System 2 thinking" is, among other things, slow. To make split-second decisions requires wit or some other favorable combination of intelligence and instinct. Anybody who has walked into a car dealership with the intent of driving off with one of the inventory has done this dance. I've known people who were denied promotion opportunities for the very reason that they chose to take time to think about decisions rather than make them on the spot, as they arose.

    "System 1" thinking, on the other hand, is imprecise and quite possibly bullshit, but it's the reason why Chad gets way more pussy than you do.

    The link to the childhood experiences makes good points but almost all Americans my age were subject to a breach of trust -- discovering or otherwise realizing that Santa Claus isn't real, despite what their parents told them. At the young age I figured it out (probably 7 or 8), I actually confronted my mom and told her she lied to me*. Being an adult, though, I think my family did the right thing -- it is an early exercise in gradually waking up from a big lie, perpetrated by the people you trust most, and in a manner that doesn't cause lashing out in anger.

    Finally, that common-sense is so codified in psychologist-speak is pretty hilarious. Reading the summary was like watching Star Trek: TNG when the Enterprise gets attacked by some amorphous space entity, and then Troi says something like "I sense that it's angry, captain."

    ---

    * The actual discussion went something like this:

    Young me: "...So Santa isn't real! You lied to me!"

    Momma: "Yeah, but didn't you feel good knowing about him, getting presents, giving him milk and cookies? I was heartbroken when I found out Santa wasn't real, it was devastating. You didn't enjoy laying out the milk and cookies, and stockings, and getting presents?"

    Young me: "Dad ate those cookies and laid out all those presents! What kind of cruel game is this? And why do all the cartoons show Santa holding one nostril while flying out the chimney? Was he sniffing the stuff in the salt-shaker daddy keeps in his pocket?"

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Troll=1, Insightful=2, Funny=2, Overrated=1, Total=6
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:42AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:42AM (#487420)

    > And why do all the cartoons show Santa holding one nostril while flying out the chimney?

    Apparently your folks never read to you?
    > ...And laying his finger aside of his nose,
    > And giving a nod, up the chimney he rose; ...
    https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/43171 [poetryfoundation.org]

    • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:52AM (1 child)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday April 01 2017, @01:52AM (#487423) Homepage

      The nod (with accompanying snort) was to prevent the bloody nose and ensure that all that good coke got taken in. And that when Santa is around, there's lots of "snow."

      Plus, if you read the whole poem, you would have determined that Santa also was an alcoholic ("His cheeks were like roses, his nose like a cherry!") and a pothead ("The stump of a pipe he held tight in his teeth,").

      So not only do I have to cope with the fact that Santa isn't real, but that all my presents were stolen from others so that Santa could get his next cocaine/pot/booze fix and wash it all down with milk and cookies. That all is a terrible thing for a kid to have to understand.

  • (Score: 2) by Lester on Saturday April 01 2017, @06:44PM

    by Lester (6231) on Saturday April 01 2017, @06:44PM (#487690) Journal

    What?! Santa Claus isn't real?