Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

journals.plos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 298 posts

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#91

Post by foldr »

red75prime wrote: post #88
foldr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>11. Imagined pain does not hurt less because it is imagined. I guess I can see how this might be classed as "not bullshit", but I don't see how it's profound at all. It just seems false to me. I agreed with all the other classifications. edit : I know complaining about downvotes is verboten here, but seriously, that's just my take on it. I'd be interested to hear an explanation of what the profound meaning is that I…

11 does make sense even if it is false. As I see it, the distinction is on make sense/doesn't make sense axis.

It's supposed to be a distinction between bullshit statements and profound statements, which isn't the same thing at all.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#92

Post by gadders »

foldr wrote: post #58
duopixel wrote: post #19

A simple self-experiment if you haven't read the paper, find which of these sentences are bullshit. Answer in order without reading further ahead, and don't go back to change your answers (as to replicate experimental conditions). * 1. A river cuts through a rock, not because of its power but it's persistence. 2. The hidden meaning transforms the abstract beauty. 3. The future elucidates irrational facts for the seek…

>11. Imagined pain does not hurt less because it is imagined. I guess I can see how this might be classed as "not bullshit", but I don't see how it's profound at all. It just seems false to me. I agreed with all the other classifications. edit : I know complaining about downvotes is verboten here, but seriously, that's just my take on it. I'd be interested to hear an explanation of what the profound meaning is that I…

I thought it was true, because of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb

I guess you could debate whether that is "imagined".

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#93

Post by raverbashing »

peteretep wrote: post #62
tabs_masterrace wrote: post #28

> Health and tolerance provides creativity for the future. This one is classified bullshit, although I think it makes at least somewhat sense.

Right. Also: > 2. The hidden meaning transforms the abstract beauty. Describes reading the description of an artwork at a Modern Art gallery pretty well

Abstract beauty can be beautiful without having a hidden meaning (or at least each one will see "the beauty they can see")

Show white noise to an Imagenet CNN and it will give you a score for something.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#94

Post by scns »

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #72
__david__ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Howso? I don't see how either health or tolerance is related to creativity… Also why only future creativity?

As someone who picked out the "two categories" of statements with 100% accuracy before looking at the answers... I think he has a point. Creativity could be proposed to be conditional on maintaining personal well-being (health) while undergoing exposure to many new experiences (tolerance). Losing your health during exposure to new things makes you reactionary and conservative and want to cling to set ideas. Have no t…

Many very creative musicians lived very unhealthy lives. Most of them even grew old, some were not so lucky eg Cobain, Hendrix etc

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#95

Post by watwut »

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #72
__david__ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Howso? I don't see how either health or tolerance is related to creativity… Also why only future creativity?

As someone who picked out the "two categories" of statements with 100% accuracy before looking at the answers... I think he has a point. Creativity could be proposed to be conditional on maintaining personal well-being (health) while undergoing exposure to many new experiences (tolerance). Losing your health during exposure to new things makes you reactionary and conservative and want to cling to set ideas. Have no t…

Conterargument is that unhappy creative people exist and are not rare. So does bigoted closed minded creative people.

Unhealthy people can also be both creative and non-creative, both cling to one set of ideas or change their minds constantly. Pain makes you more nervous, frustrated, snappy etc, but you can still be creative.

Conversely, you can be tolerant and healthy, but still completely non-creative, whether it means generating new ideas or creating things. You can be tolerant, healthy and completely passive.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#96

Post by raverbashing »

folli wrote: post #4

I feel like this is some meta-level test for the reader. Pseudo-profound bullshit statement: "Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior"; can the reader distinguish this bullshit paper from a profound paper?

Extreme nihilism seems to be as naive as buying any falsely profound phrase.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#97

Post by foldr »

gadders wrote: post #92
foldr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>11. Imagined pain does not hurt less because it is imagined. I guess I can see how this might be classed as "not bullshit", but I don't see how it's profound at all. It just seems false to me. I agreed with all the other classifications. edit : I know complaining about downvotes is verboten here, but seriously, that's just my take on it. I'd be interested to hear an explanation of what the profound meaning is that I…

I thought it was true, because of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb I guess you could debate whether that is "imagined".

1) It doesn't make sense to call that "imaginary pain". The pain is real -- that's why it's a problem.

2) Do we know that phantom limb pain does not hurt less than the corresponding non-phantom pains? It seems entirely possible that while phantom limb pain is very acute, it's not as actually as bad as the pain associated with losing the limb in the first place.

3) Even waiving 1 and 2, that would be one rather obscure instance of an imaginary pain and a real pain having the same intensity, which would in no way establish the truth of the general statement.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#98

Post by sophistication »

nichtich wrote: post #68
__david__ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Howso? I don't see how either health or tolerance is related to creativity… Also why only future creativity?

Because they imply a safer and longer life and the creativity of dead people are zero. I think it makes some sense.

There might be slightly positive causal correlations between health and creativity (probably not too strong though because there are lots of mentally deranged successful artists), and, more plausibly, between tolerance and creativity, but that's not enough profundity. It does not give you that "kick" of information gain you get from the profound sentences. It abuses a poetic/proverbial form to only state weak to non-existent causal associations and henceforth it is bullshit.

Re: Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior

#100

Post by c3534l »

It's entirely possible that they weren't testing "bullshit-sensitivity," but some underlying language skills, IQ, or even something like creativity (required to give the sentences have meaning). I don't think that they test has sufficient evidence that it measures what they claim it measures.

Second, donation experience did not have a statistically significant relationship with "bullshit sensitivity," which is kind of a bad smell. As for prior plausibility, the authors admit "previous theory and research does not give us strong reasons for predicting a direct relation between reactions to bullshit and prosocial behavior." The study also lacked a control group.

Post reply on HN