Masters of the art of hyperbole
April 26, 2019 12:08 PM Subscribe
Rich guys are most likely to have no idea what they’re talking about, study suggests
Same article outside of the Washington Post paywall but the data tables aren't included.
The research: Bullshitters. Who Are They and What Do We Know about Their Lives? (pdf)
Same article outside of the Washington Post paywall but the data tables aren't included.
The research: Bullshitters. Who Are They and What Do We Know about Their Lives? (pdf)
Uh... *glances around nervously*... the declarative fraction of the article you least agree with.
posted by axiom at 12:17 PM on April 26, 2019 [33 favorites]
posted by axiom at 12:17 PM on April 26, 2019 [33 favorites]
A boss I had- who lost 12 million bucks, drive our projects off a cliff and then walking away with a 500k firing package- was a master of saying nothing. He had 2 major techniques. The first was to latch onto something he had heard someone said. For instance, we were making a first person shooter and in a meeting we were discussing texture resolution. For months afterwards he'd make big, public e-mails and proclamations about "lack of texture resolution". If anyone challenged him on it he'd just start shouting and saying that you didn't understand what the challenges were.
The second was deflection and answering questions with questions- "What do you think about the balance of the game, Bossman?" "Well, why dont you tell me what your issues with the balance are and I can respond to those"
Useless, but held up by a cabal of other useless white dudes.
posted by GilloD at 12:25 PM on April 26, 2019 [87 favorites]
The second was deflection and answering questions with questions- "What do you think about the balance of the game, Bossman?" "Well, why dont you tell me what your issues with the balance are and I can respond to those"
Useless, but held up by a cabal of other useless white dudes.
posted by GilloD at 12:25 PM on April 26, 2019 [87 favorites]
LOL-ing: "Taken as a whole, the results appear to suggest that the countries with the greatest propensity toward bombast also have the smallest variances between groups living within them. In the U.S. and Canada, for instance, there may simply be so much BS going around that everyone ends up partaking in it."
posted by nikoniko at 12:29 PM on April 26, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by nikoniko at 12:29 PM on April 26, 2019 [19 favorites]
I was just thinking today about something one of my bosses said to me a couple months ago. He was praising my work and contributions effusively but also said that at times it seems like I'm disengaged from the conversations happening, but he knows I'm not because every now and then I'll make an insightful comment that shows that I was in fact actively listening the entire time. And ever since then I've wondered: is this just because I don't shoot my fool mouth off about every damn thing and this is apparently unusual? (n.b. I am a lady and I work with technology.)
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:35 PM on April 26, 2019 [124 favorites]
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:35 PM on April 26, 2019 [124 favorites]
In the U.S. and Canada, for instance, there may simply be so much BS going around that everyone ends up partaking in it.
America may not have invented bullshit, but we perfected it.
posted by murphy slaw at 12:45 PM on April 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
America may not have invented bullshit, but we perfected it.
posted by murphy slaw at 12:45 PM on April 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
I get the same comment all of the time, soren_lorensen, also a woman working with technology.
posted by tofu_crouton at 12:47 PM on April 26, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by tofu_crouton at 12:47 PM on April 26, 2019 [12 favorites]
I think we learn it growing up. I can't tell you the number of times when, assigned a 5- or 10-page English or history paper, we fussed to our friends, "I still need two more pages of bullshit!"
posted by Melismata at 12:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
posted by Melismata at 12:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
As a woman in tech who DOES shoot my fool mouth off about every damn thing, my male bosses also HATE THAT and are so confused about how or why a woman would have something to say about anything at any time, so in conclusion the ways that women in tech should behave in order to be respected is a land of contrasts.
posted by bleep at 12:52 PM on April 26, 2019 [101 favorites]
posted by bleep at 12:52 PM on April 26, 2019 [101 favorites]
As a rich guy I can confirm that this article is complete bullshit.
I haven't read it, of course. I'm too busy doing Very Important Things. Nevertheless you can be assured that it's a total trash fire.
If that isn't convincing enough for you, there's a whole bunch of other rich guys who'll agree with me.
posted by happyinmotion at 12:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [31 favorites]
I haven't read it, of course. I'm too busy doing Very Important Things. Nevertheless you can be assured that it's a total trash fire.
If that isn't convincing enough for you, there's a whole bunch of other rich guys who'll agree with me.
posted by happyinmotion at 12:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [31 favorites]
Well, that mansplains that.
posted by y2karl at 12:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [19 favorites]
posted by y2karl at 12:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [19 favorites]
I think this is what happens when you have a culture that refuses to accept the idea of privilege, because then your successes aren't because of (or your failures in spite of) the enormous advantages you started with, but because of your mastery of all things. Someone who has millions or billions of dollars could be brilliant, or they could have just inherited a ton of money and managed to earn less than if they'd just put it all in a savings account (please don't say the name we're all thinking). But they've got tons of money! You must be smart to be successful! It's a lot less flattering to know that you only have so much because you always had it.
Or someone could be genuinely smart about some things, but not know what their own limitations are because everyone wants to get an in with them. There's this thought process like "eh, we'll just flatter them a little," but if that's all a person hears, then they're not going to know where they end and where the ass-kissing begins.
This study was about adolescents, but this is the culture that wealthy kids grow up in, one that they themselves will inherit. There's a baseline of what they can expect for themselves in the future, and it's often predicated on not questioning where it all came from. I went to high school with rich-ass kids, I've known rich people all my life, and I can say with confidence that very few people have had that much self-awareness. Everyone else is bolstered by these false narratives of personal triumph. I'll never forget the kid in high school who, when the topic of privilege came up, said "hey! My dad only makes six figures!"
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:02 PM on April 26, 2019 [32 favorites]
Or someone could be genuinely smart about some things, but not know what their own limitations are because everyone wants to get an in with them. There's this thought process like "eh, we'll just flatter them a little," but if that's all a person hears, then they're not going to know where they end and where the ass-kissing begins.
This study was about adolescents, but this is the culture that wealthy kids grow up in, one that they themselves will inherit. There's a baseline of what they can expect for themselves in the future, and it's often predicated on not questioning where it all came from. I went to high school with rich-ass kids, I've known rich people all my life, and I can say with confidence that very few people have had that much self-awareness. Everyone else is bolstered by these false narratives of personal triumph. I'll never forget the kid in high school who, when the topic of privilege came up, said "hey! My dad only makes six figures!"
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:02 PM on April 26, 2019 [32 favorites]
Jeff Bezos could not be reached for comment.
How many 15 year olds know jack shit about anything?
posted by Ideefixe at 1:04 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
How many 15 year olds know jack shit about anything?
posted by Ideefixe at 1:04 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
I was just thinking today about something one of my bosses said to me a couple months ago. He was praising my work and contributions effusively but also said that at times it seems like I'm disengaged from the conversations happening, but he knows I'm not because every now and then I'll make an insightful comment that shows that I was in fact actively listening the entire time. And ever since then I've wondered: is this just because I don't shoot my fool mouth off about every damn thing and this is apparently unusual? (n.b. I am a lady and I work with technology.)
It's like they don't realize that LISTENING is an option in conversation
posted by clockzero at 1:05 PM on April 26, 2019 [33 favorites]
It's like they don't realize that LISTENING is an option in conversation
posted by clockzero at 1:05 PM on April 26, 2019 [33 favorites]
This is something I've noticed in moving from a more humanities centered lab to a more tech centered lab over the past two years. In the tech centered lab, being an active part of the conversation is important, and debate and argument are valued. Often that means taking positions or fronting understanding that you might not be fully qualified for, and then taking pleasure from the act of conversation and argument itself, rather than treating conversation and argument as a means to an end in reaching an understanding.
To the study itself: The results seem intuitively true, but I have some questions about the methods with relation to the claims. The data was collected solely with teenagers who were in a testing environment (it doesn't specify post- or pre-survey). That kind of raises my eyebrows (especially with the way the WaPo article is reported) for a number of reasons, but among them is the atmosphere of the survey, with the participants either having just or just about to take a test. Also, the efficacy of bullshitting isn't tested, but rather the answer to three scale questions about knowledge of certain fake terms. However, there are any number of confounding reasons that someone might rank high knowledge in a non-existant term - especially a novice of the subject who's in a high pressure environment.
That being said, the differences (whether we want to call this 'bullshitting' or not) between demographics is an interesting contribution, and seems significant. Whatever is being measured here, it does appear that Rich American Males are more likely to do it.
posted by codacorolla at 1:08 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
To the study itself: The results seem intuitively true, but I have some questions about the methods with relation to the claims. The data was collected solely with teenagers who were in a testing environment (it doesn't specify post- or pre-survey). That kind of raises my eyebrows (especially with the way the WaPo article is reported) for a number of reasons, but among them is the atmosphere of the survey, with the participants either having just or just about to take a test. Also, the efficacy of bullshitting isn't tested, but rather the answer to three scale questions about knowledge of certain fake terms. However, there are any number of confounding reasons that someone might rank high knowledge in a non-existant term - especially a novice of the subject who's in a high pressure environment.
That being said, the differences (whether we want to call this 'bullshitting' or not) between demographics is an interesting contribution, and seems significant. Whatever is being measured here, it does appear that Rich American Males are more likely to do it.
posted by codacorolla at 1:08 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Well, that mansplains that.
It would be, at most, .66 mansplaining. And it’s more confirming and speculating than explaining, and “.66 manfirming and manulating” sounds like something entirely different.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:10 PM on April 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
It would be, at most, .66 mansplaining. And it’s more confirming and speculating than explaining, and “.66 manfirming and manulating” sounds like something entirely different.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:10 PM on April 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
One caveat to consider is that the study subjects were adolescents. Though it seems a good bet to assume that personality traits developed as teens will carry over into adulthood, this study isn’t proof of that.
So... the study doesn't show the habits of rich men, but rich boys. The headline mentions "rich guys," no doubt deliberately ambiguous. The phrase "teenage boys" does not appear in the article.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:20 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
So... the study doesn't show the habits of rich men, but rich boys. The headline mentions "rich guys," no doubt deliberately ambiguous. The phrase "teenage boys" does not appear in the article.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:20 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
It would be, at most, .66 mansplaining. And it’s more confirming and speculating than explaining, and “.66 manfirming and manulating” sounds like something entirely different.
You are 132% correct, sir! /Ed McMahon
posted by y2karl at 1:28 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
You are 132% correct, sir! /Ed McMahon
posted by y2karl at 1:28 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
As the Canadian who invented declarative fractions, I'm amused by all this hubbub.
posted by clawsoon at 1:30 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 1:30 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
I also have 25 Years™ experience in Enterprise™ software development.
posted by clawsoon at 1:36 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by clawsoon at 1:36 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
So water's still wet super-water that is drowning us all?
posted by es_de_bah at 1:38 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by es_de_bah at 1:38 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Has the US generally moved away from points-off-for-errors grading? When I TA'd in my middle age I had students act outraged at the idea, though I thought it was normal. My older profs backed me up on it more, but they were also more likely to be tenured, so.
If you're not penalized for being wrong, shooting off your mouth at random isn't the worst strategy. So GilloD's boss is there, and it's the definition of fail-upwards privilege. But we could make it less natural earlier on.
(Side note: am perplexed by your first paragraph, codacorolla, because it attributes values for debate exactly the reverse of how the Two Cultures arguments of my youth did.)
posted by clew at 1:44 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
If you're not penalized for being wrong, shooting off your mouth at random isn't the worst strategy. So GilloD's boss is there, and it's the definition of fail-upwards privilege. But we could make it less natural earlier on.
(Side note: am perplexed by your first paragraph, codacorolla, because it attributes values for debate exactly the reverse of how the Two Cultures arguments of my youth did.)
posted by clew at 1:44 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Rich guy here. Can confirm, I have no fucking idea what I'm talking about.
posted by allkindsoftime at 1:46 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by allkindsoftime at 1:46 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Using a data set spanning nine predominantly English-speaking countries, researchers delineated a number of key findings. First, men are much more likely than women to master the art of hyperbole, as are the wealthy relative to the poor or middle class.
The study drew from the Program for International Student Assessment, which is administered to tens of thousands of 15-year-olds worldwide.
Fifteen-year-olds are not men and women, and they have not mastered anything, for fuck's sake. Perhaps the ROOTS of the behavior can be observed in children, but go ahead and complete a study with actual adults, and in a variety of subject matter to suss out the gender biases of the respondents. Sure, all of these fifteen year old boys claim to be experts in fictional mathematical disciplines, but would they claim that kind of knowledge of fictional literary disciplines?
posted by desuetude at 1:47 PM on April 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
The study drew from the Program for International Student Assessment, which is administered to tens of thousands of 15-year-olds worldwide.
Fifteen-year-olds are not men and women, and they have not mastered anything, for fuck's sake. Perhaps the ROOTS of the behavior can be observed in children, but go ahead and complete a study with actual adults, and in a variety of subject matter to suss out the gender biases of the respondents. Sure, all of these fifteen year old boys claim to be experts in fictional mathematical disciplines, but would they claim that kind of knowledge of fictional literary disciplines?
posted by desuetude at 1:47 PM on April 26, 2019 [6 favorites]
(Not denying that rich guys are the biggest bullshitters, just saying that this article doesn't prove it with SCIENCE.)
posted by desuetude at 1:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by desuetude at 1:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Also, from the Bullshit white paper, this is gold: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
As in PISA shit, amirite? This had to be intentional.
posted by allkindsoftime at 1:49 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
As in PISA shit, amirite? This had to be intentional.
posted by allkindsoftime at 1:49 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
It would be, at most, .66 mansplaining.
you're confusing proper numbers and declarative fractions.
posted by Dr. Twist at 1:51 PM on April 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
you're confusing proper numbers and declarative fractions.
posted by Dr. Twist at 1:51 PM on April 26, 2019 [9 favorites]
"How many 15 year olds know jack shit about anything?"
Well, as someone who watches Masterchef Junior, i'd say there are a slew of people under the age of 12 that know more than I do about cooking. And I'm relatively proud of my cooking ability.
More than that, when I was 18 I had a computer mentor that was 14.
Truth is, kids can be focused and are actually quite bright. If we let them delve into a thing and nourish and encourage them, they'll achieve a level of mastery that astounds us. That's not how school is set up, of course, so we rarely see that sort of performance in school - it's darned near impossible for kids to be given the resources and encouragement in such an environment.
Certainly they aren't wise, but hell, most 15 year olds doing well in school probably know more about geography, mathematics, and a slew of other topics that I'm pretty rusty on these days.
posted by el io at 1:54 PM on April 26, 2019 [18 favorites]
Well, as someone who watches Masterchef Junior, i'd say there are a slew of people under the age of 12 that know more than I do about cooking. And I'm relatively proud of my cooking ability.
More than that, when I was 18 I had a computer mentor that was 14.
Truth is, kids can be focused and are actually quite bright. If we let them delve into a thing and nourish and encourage them, they'll achieve a level of mastery that astounds us. That's not how school is set up, of course, so we rarely see that sort of performance in school - it's darned near impossible for kids to be given the resources and encouragement in such an environment.
Certainly they aren't wise, but hell, most 15 year olds doing well in school probably know more about geography, mathematics, and a slew of other topics that I'm pretty rusty on these days.
posted by el io at 1:54 PM on April 26, 2019 [18 favorites]
If you're not penalized for being wrong, shooting off your mouth at random isn't the worst strategy.
This! When I worked for a tutoring agency grading SAT essays, we weren't allowed to take points off for incorrect facts. As long as the spelling and grammar were correct, the structure was correct, and it didn't contradict itself, nothing else mattered.
To a certain extent, I understand that policy, but it actively encouraged to kids to write hot garbage. I had to give a passing score to an essay that contained this comically incorrect sentence: "Martin Luther King ended racism in the United States when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1966."
posted by Garm at 2:09 PM on April 26, 2019 [35 favorites]
This! When I worked for a tutoring agency grading SAT essays, we weren't allowed to take points off for incorrect facts. As long as the spelling and grammar were correct, the structure was correct, and it didn't contradict itself, nothing else mattered.
To a certain extent, I understand that policy, but it actively encouraged to kids to write hot garbage. I had to give a passing score to an essay that contained this comically incorrect sentence: "Martin Luther King ended racism in the United States when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1966."
posted by Garm at 2:09 PM on April 26, 2019 [35 favorites]
HORROR, Garm.
posted by clew at 2:22 PM on April 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by clew at 2:22 PM on April 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
It would be, at most, .66 mansplaining.
you're confusing proper numbers and declarative fractions
I stand corrected and exposed as an innumerate idiot.
posted by y2karl at 2:43 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
you're confusing proper numbers and declarative fractions
I stand corrected and exposed as an innumerate idiot.
posted by y2karl at 2:43 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
The most recent comment on the WaPo article when I read it: "Think author needs to refresh some schooling. The results results state that none of the top 25% economic groups were close to a standard deviation removed from the mean for BS, meaning it is not statistically significant conclusion"
Which is a total BS misunderstanding of the relationship between standard deviation and statistical significance, which is kind of depressing in its own right...
posted by Skwirl at 2:44 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Which is a total BS misunderstanding of the relationship between standard deviation and statistical significance, which is kind of depressing in its own right...
posted by Skwirl at 2:44 PM on April 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
I have had, for nearly all my life, a nearly paralyzing fear of being WRONG. The notion of someone thinking I'm full of shit, or that I don't know what I'm talking about, is just horrifying to me.
Consequently, I rarely assert myself in conversation, but when I do it's not bullshit. I know what I'm talking about, and can probably provide references that support what I've said.
This is, weirdly, not how most upper-middle-class middle-aged white dudes conduct themselves. I have no idea why.
It DID seem to be more common in the late-80s code nerd circles that molded me, but out among normal people it's almost a handicap. I definitely never overstate or exaggerate my credentials or professional history in interviews, and I'm sure I've lost out on jobs because of it.
posted by uberchet at 3:49 PM on April 26, 2019 [26 favorites]
Consequently, I rarely assert myself in conversation, but when I do it's not bullshit. I know what I'm talking about, and can probably provide references that support what I've said.
This is, weirdly, not how most upper-middle-class middle-aged white dudes conduct themselves. I have no idea why.
It DID seem to be more common in the late-80s code nerd circles that molded me, but out among normal people it's almost a handicap. I definitely never overstate or exaggerate my credentials or professional history in interviews, and I'm sure I've lost out on jobs because of it.
posted by uberchet at 3:49 PM on April 26, 2019 [26 favorites]
you're confusing proper numbers and declarative fractions.
It's not so much confusion as subjunctive scaling.
posted by straight at 4:18 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's not so much confusion as subjunctive scaling.
posted by straight at 4:18 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
turns. out.
posted by entropicamericana at 4:24 PM on April 26, 2019
posted by entropicamericana at 4:24 PM on April 26, 2019
Wow, they sure make a lot of assumptions from a limited set of information in the study and article. I particularly like that they cite self-reported rankings from teens they allege as bullshitters as a measure of those same teens beliefs as if not noticing their claim in the first part would render the accuracy of information in the second part automatically suspect, including claims around socio-economic status.
That they rely on a single test with three fake math terms as establishing someone being a bullshitter is not particularly convincing to my untrained eye as I certainly would think anyone who made broad assumptions from such limited information in real life would be full of shit. But, hey, I'm no social scientist so what do I know?
Anecdotally, as someone who regularly buses and deals with other poor people, the idea that bullshit belongs more to the rich is, well, rich. Subject matter differs, but empty claims of expertise and bluffs of ability are a constant feature of discussions I hear.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:32 PM on April 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
That they rely on a single test with three fake math terms as establishing someone being a bullshitter is not particularly convincing to my untrained eye as I certainly would think anyone who made broad assumptions from such limited information in real life would be full of shit. But, hey, I'm no social scientist so what do I know?
Anecdotally, as someone who regularly buses and deals with other poor people, the idea that bullshit belongs more to the rich is, well, rich. Subject matter differs, but empty claims of expertise and bluffs of ability are a constant feature of discussions I hear.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:32 PM on April 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
I think it's completely outrageous that the Washington Post wrote an article with the headline "Rich guys are most likely to have no idea what they’re talking about, study suggests" when what actually happened is that 15-year-old boys from wealthier households were more likely to claim they heard of a math word on a math test (PISA, even, which suffers from students-don't-care-about-the-test problems) than 15-year-old girls from poorer households. I think this study predicts absolutely zero about the behavior of any "rich guys" in any non-test-taking setting.
This is so ridiculous to me that it's going to markedly decrease my trust in future things I see published by the Washington Post business section, which I would have expected to have a standard of quality. Headlines should be based on something.
posted by value of information at 5:40 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
This is so ridiculous to me that it's going to markedly decrease my trust in future things I see published by the Washington Post business section, which I would have expected to have a standard of quality. Headlines should be based on something.
posted by value of information at 5:40 PM on April 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
Even apart from the predictably shitty reporting from WaPo (I don't hold any mainstream outlet to very high regard in terms of science writing), the study itself overextends its data by quite a bit. I looked through IZA's website, because I was suspicious that this might be a jokey or half-serious type of white paper, but apparently the 'discussion paper' line is a venue they have for pre-publication work that's slated to go into a full journal.
posted by codacorolla at 5:51 PM on April 26, 2019
posted by codacorolla at 5:51 PM on April 26, 2019
early on as a programmer I learned the only correct answer to
"can you do X" is
"Of course I can do X" -- while madly reading books on "X" ...
These days google would handle that.
To which what I really mean is ... confidence in your core skills matters ;)
[being a "Pretender" -- like Jarod -- doesn't hurt, but is not essential]
This may apply to other fields*.
*honestly I think the days of learning a trade and doing that until you retire are gone...You have to be able to retrain.
posted by twidget at 6:28 PM on April 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
"can you do X" is
"Of course I can do X" -- while madly reading books on "X" ...
These days google would handle that.
To which what I really mean is ... confidence in your core skills matters ;)
[being a "Pretender" -- like Jarod -- doesn't hurt, but is not essential]
This may apply to other fields*.
*honestly I think the days of learning a trade and doing that until you retire are gone...You have to be able to retrain.
posted by twidget at 6:28 PM on April 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
"Of course I can do X" -- while madly reading books on "X" ...
Tank, I need a pilot program for a B-212 helicopter.
posted by Foosnark at 6:31 PM on April 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Tank, I need a pilot program for a B-212 helicopter.
posted by Foosnark at 6:31 PM on April 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Skwirl: "Which is a total BS misunderstanding of the relationship between standard deviation and statistical significance, which is kind of depressing in its own right..."Variations on that same BS have become quite common recently, in places I frequent where sadfucks regularly turn up & attempt to 'demolish' sensible discussion. I suspect it originated from one of the usual suspect sources and they've all latched on to it as this month's logic-hammer.
posted by Pinback at 6:44 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Tank, I need a pilot program for a B-212 helicopter.
I mean ... (best Jeremy Clarkson voice)"How hard can it be?"
posted by twidget at 6:51 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
I mean ... (best Jeremy Clarkson voice)"How hard can it be?"
posted by twidget at 6:51 PM on April 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
A while back I was working on something for my boss-at-the-time and asked him to explain how what foo was and how it related to the task. I sat in confusion, trying to take notes, while he talked in circles. He would never just give me a straight answer about what exactly foo was and why it was important. Eventually I did more research and included my description of foo - completely different from anything he had said - in the completed task. He signed off and we never spoke of it again.
Also, if I had a dollar for every time I did an ass-ton of research and summarized it and handed it over to a male boss only to have him demonstrate in meetings with subject-matter experts that he 1) hadn't really read it and 2) had absolutely no idea what he was talking about.... At the time I was deeply embarrassed and thought it reflected poorly on me, but looking back I'm sure the SMEs were used to it.
posted by bunderful at 7:53 PM on April 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
Also, if I had a dollar for every time I did an ass-ton of research and summarized it and handed it over to a male boss only to have him demonstrate in meetings with subject-matter experts that he 1) hadn't really read it and 2) had absolutely no idea what he was talking about.... At the time I was deeply embarrassed and thought it reflected poorly on me, but looking back I'm sure the SMEs were used to it.
posted by bunderful at 7:53 PM on April 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
I don't know how well anecdotes are worth over a study using dubious methodology (too many variables), but goddamned if worthless rich kids who end up in C-suite positions in my organizations are so much more than Canadian rich kids who end up in C-suite positions in my organizations.
I've had Canadian and CCCP rich kids in C-suite positions in jobs that I've worked for, but the American rich kids were the absolute worst about acknowledging personal responsibility/ truthfulness/ consequences. At least the CCCP guys knew they were lying, knew they were deliberately shirking their responsibilities/ liabilities.
An (older) terrible mainlander owner of a company I worked for was a master manipulator, but he had nothing on the American kid who tried to steal the company from the founders (myself included) of my current company - he managed to completely bamboozle the grew-up-poor CEO co-founder (Canadian, but who made bank from working his way up in oil&gas - barely finished highschool, but bankrolled the company at the beginning) but the Canadian non-C cofounder (PhD), CSO (PhD), and non-C myself (PhD) pegged him (the American rich kid) immediately as a shitstain.
We finally got rid of the kid, but at great expense to the company - because as a rich kid he knew all of the dirty tricks to extract money from the company and protect himself from prosecution/ retribution.
Grew-up-poor-but-now-rich-(and overpaying himself) CEO was the hardest hurdle to get past, and the CEO is bumbling around trying to enrich himself personally again by bringing in more American rich former-boys into the company.
posted by porpoise at 8:22 PM on April 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
I've had Canadian and CCCP rich kids in C-suite positions in jobs that I've worked for, but the American rich kids were the absolute worst about acknowledging personal responsibility/ truthfulness/ consequences. At least the CCCP guys knew they were lying, knew they were deliberately shirking their responsibilities/ liabilities.
An (older) terrible mainlander owner of a company I worked for was a master manipulator, but he had nothing on the American kid who tried to steal the company from the founders (myself included) of my current company - he managed to completely bamboozle the grew-up-poor CEO co-founder (Canadian, but who made bank from working his way up in oil&gas - barely finished highschool, but bankrolled the company at the beginning) but the Canadian non-C cofounder (PhD), CSO (PhD), and non-C myself (PhD) pegged him (the American rich kid) immediately as a shitstain.
We finally got rid of the kid, but at great expense to the company - because as a rich kid he knew all of the dirty tricks to extract money from the company and protect himself from prosecution/ retribution.
Grew-up-poor-but-now-rich-(and overpaying himself) CEO was the hardest hurdle to get past, and the CEO is bumbling around trying to enrich himself personally again by bringing in more American rich former-boys into the company.
posted by porpoise at 8:22 PM on April 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
henlo mgmt at every job I've had
posted by fluttering hellfire at 8:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by fluttering hellfire at 8:48 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Even apart from the predictably shitty reporting from WaPo (I don't hold any mainstream outlet to very high regard in terms of science writing), the study itself overextends its data by quite a bit. I looked through IZA's website, because I was suspicious that this might be a jokey or half-serious type of white paper, but apparently the 'discussion paper' line is a venue they have for pre-publication work that's slated to go into a full journal.
Man, 'discussion paper' sounds totally like something a high school smart ass would try to sell an inexperienced teacher, or maybe a sub. In fact I wonder if this article was written by some rich white 15 year old boy. The entire thing reeks of 80s Matthew Broderick avoiding work and trying to reap credit.
posted by Cris E at 10:28 PM on April 26, 2019
Man, 'discussion paper' sounds totally like something a high school smart ass would try to sell an inexperienced teacher, or maybe a sub. In fact I wonder if this article was written by some rich white 15 year old boy. The entire thing reeks of 80s Matthew Broderick avoiding work and trying to reap credit.
posted by Cris E at 10:28 PM on April 26, 2019
The byline of the ruling class is fake it till you make it.
posted by simra at 10:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by simra at 10:56 PM on April 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
This makes sense. Doing your research and getting your facts in a row is hard work, and a society that regards wealth as a proxy for merit would treat it as a line of credit against having to work. Which is why Amazon warehouse workers are auto-fired if they dawdle or take toilet breaks whereas professionals can get away with doing personal web browsing on their work machines, why high-powered lawyers and politicians have younger, poorly-paid assistants to dig in libraries and distill masses of text to bullet points, and so on.
Also, if someone has been rewarded with wealth by the invisible hand, people trust that they're an upstanding person who wouldn't just lie and cheat. If they handwave about figures and causes, we trust that they have the arguments nailed down but just not at hand at the moment, what with their busy schedules and heavy responsibilities and all. (This also applies to “hereditary meritocracy”; someone who has been born into wealth, we trust, also assimilated with their mother's milk the noble patrician values that underpin all that is good in civilisation*, and would take the responsibilities of their stature so seriously that they wouldn't even need to be consciously reminded of them. This is related to the way that the physically attractive and the well-spoken are subconsciously ascribed a higher moral goodness than those not so much.)
* of course, some say that the values inculcated into those born into wealth are more likely to be ruthlessness and an instrumental hauteur towards other people, and more inclined to cheat, but don't listen to those people because they're lousy no-good commies.
posted by acb at 5:56 AM on April 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Also, if someone has been rewarded with wealth by the invisible hand, people trust that they're an upstanding person who wouldn't just lie and cheat. If they handwave about figures and causes, we trust that they have the arguments nailed down but just not at hand at the moment, what with their busy schedules and heavy responsibilities and all. (This also applies to “hereditary meritocracy”; someone who has been born into wealth, we trust, also assimilated with their mother's milk the noble patrician values that underpin all that is good in civilisation*, and would take the responsibilities of their stature so seriously that they wouldn't even need to be consciously reminded of them. This is related to the way that the physically attractive and the well-spoken are subconsciously ascribed a higher moral goodness than those not so much.)
* of course, some say that the values inculcated into those born into wealth are more likely to be ruthlessness and an instrumental hauteur towards other people, and more inclined to cheat, but don't listen to those people because they're lousy no-good commies.
posted by acb at 5:56 AM on April 27, 2019 [6 favorites]
Study seems dubious as anything, but I keep laughing at the idea that mansplaining exists because before women entered the workforce, men were all standing around explaining what little they knew to one another and no one knew enough to call bullshit.
posted by lauranesson at 8:22 AM on April 27, 2019
posted by lauranesson at 8:22 AM on April 27, 2019
I have had, for nearly all my life, a nearly paralyzing fear of being WRONG. The notion of someone thinking I'm full of shit, or that I don't know what I'm talking about, is just horrifying to me.
Consequently, I rarely assert myself in conversation, but when I do it's not bullshit. I know what I'm talking about, and can probably provide references that support what I've said.
My career took a huge sharp bend upward when I realized I'm the same and I stopped being afraid of being wrong or not knowing something. However, that makes me unafraid to ask questions, not to bloviate about shit I don't understand. And that has put me a second step ahead.
posted by ctmf at 9:30 AM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
Consequently, I rarely assert myself in conversation, but when I do it's not bullshit. I know what I'm talking about, and can probably provide references that support what I've said.
My career took a huge sharp bend upward when I realized I'm the same and I stopped being afraid of being wrong or not knowing something. However, that makes me unafraid to ask questions, not to bloviate about shit I don't understand. And that has put me a second step ahead.
posted by ctmf at 9:30 AM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
I don't get why people are going on about how much fifteen year olds don't know. I knew well before fifteen that I (AFAB) would get punished for doing the same things my brother would be rewarded for, no matter how obvious a lie he told or what the results of the lie were. I was clear on that by easily eight. I saw this over and over at home, at school, and everywhere else. Fifteen year olds definitely know what kinds of lies they'll get rewarded for, and what kinds will get them punished, and a huge chunk of that is about the intersections of various kinds of privilege. It's just another facet of all the "oh, boys will be boys!" crap.
posted by bile and syntax at 11:37 AM on April 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
posted by bile and syntax at 11:37 AM on April 27, 2019 [11 favorites]
We finally got rid of the kid, but at great expense to the company - because as a rich kid he knew all of the dirty tricks to extract money from the company and protect himself from prosecution/ retribution.
This is the evidence that the jerk rich are not suffering from affluenza, from too easy a childhood leading to not understanding how hard the world is. This is the evidence that they understand where the problems are and use their private-law to make everyone else deal with them.
(There isn't a crisp line between good luck and different-law-for-me literal privilege. Still, they are different things in the extremes, and the latter is worse and tractable to social contumely, so I like to call it out.)
posted by clew at 11:37 AM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
This is the evidence that the jerk rich are not suffering from affluenza, from too easy a childhood leading to not understanding how hard the world is. This is the evidence that they understand where the problems are and use their private-law to make everyone else deal with them.
(There isn't a crisp line between good luck and different-law-for-me literal privilege. Still, they are different things in the extremes, and the latter is worse and tractable to social contumely, so I like to call it out.)
posted by clew at 11:37 AM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
How many 15 year olds know jack shit about anything?
Are you kidding? I knew absolutely everything about everything when I was 15. It took many years and maximum effort to become as ignorant as I am today.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:58 PM on April 27, 2019 [16 favorites]
Are you kidding? I knew absolutely everything about everything when I was 15. It took many years and maximum effort to become as ignorant as I am today.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:58 PM on April 27, 2019 [16 favorites]
I've long said that the keys to success are ego, bullshit, connections, persistence and timing.
Note brains and talent didn't make the cut.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 2:08 PM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
Note brains and talent didn't make the cut.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 2:08 PM on April 27, 2019 [1 favorite]
I feel like this follows the ma space contours of the imposter syndrome.
posted by Word_Salad at 7:49 PM on April 27, 2019
posted by Word_Salad at 7:49 PM on April 27, 2019
What bothered me about this non-peer reviewed "discussion paper" is that there is no mention (that I could find) of approval by their research ethics committee. They told people (minors!) that they were going to assess their "reading, mathematics, and science literacy" and instead made them experimental subjects in this BS research, for WaPo readers to snigger at?
posted by bleston hamilton station at 4:44 AM on April 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by bleston hamilton station at 4:44 AM on April 28, 2019 [2 favorites]
I was making small talk with a young (24ish?) (white) guy yesterday. We got on the topic of work. He was in tech somehow, I worked at a nonprofit that worked in schools. 'Oh!' He said. 'You work in a nonprofit? I'm actually in the process of starting a nonprofit right now!' He went on to tell me about the book he was starting to write on the subject, his philosophy on what we get wrong about education, his dream to open a college someday.
I listened, because of course there's nothing wrong with having interests or dreams and he seemed perfectly sincere, but the only thing I could think about was what it would feel like to have been socialized to be so cheerfully confident in my abilities, so trusting of my perceptions, and so excited about what I could bring to the world.
posted by geegollygosh at 5:58 AM on April 28, 2019 [13 favorites]
I listened, because of course there's nothing wrong with having interests or dreams and he seemed perfectly sincere, but the only thing I could think about was what it would feel like to have been socialized to be so cheerfully confident in my abilities, so trusting of my perceptions, and so excited about what I could bring to the world.
posted by geegollygosh at 5:58 AM on April 28, 2019 [13 favorites]
The byline of the ruling class is fake it till you make it.
Yeah, BS is just the natural result of following the guiding principles of our society
Yeah, BS is just the natural result of following the guiding principles of our society
1) Fake it til you make it (pretend to know shit)posted by xigxag at 9:09 AM on April 28, 2019
2) Always be closing (do that shit all the time)
3) If it ain't broke don't fix it (keep doing that shit even after it's served its purpose)
What bothered me about this non-peer reviewed "discussion paper" is that there is no mention (that I could find) of approval by their research ethics committee. They told people (minors!) that they were going to assess their "reading, mathematics, and science literacy" and instead made them experimental subjects in this BS research, for WaPo readers to snigger at?
It's analysis of a dataset collected through an international education non-profit, so that non-profit has taken on whatever IRB processes would be required through data collection. It's similar to census data, in the way that it's been anonymized before the current researcher touches it, so it doesn't hit the requirement of most institutions' standards for IRB approval. This is Berkeley's policy, but seems pretty standard for most large research institution boards.
posted by codacorolla at 11:06 AM on April 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
It's analysis of a dataset collected through an international education non-profit, so that non-profit has taken on whatever IRB processes would be required through data collection. It's similar to census data, in the way that it's been anonymized before the current researcher touches it, so it doesn't hit the requirement of most institutions' standards for IRB approval. This is Berkeley's policy, but seems pretty standard for most large research institution boards.
posted by codacorolla at 11:06 AM on April 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
« Older The point of this game is *not* to up the body... | "Chronic inflammation is uniformly damaging and is... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by box at 12:12 PM on April 26, 2019 [9 favorites]