171–180 of 363 posts
No seriously, we all, mostly lie. Stop and think about it for a second.
It could be just a simple thing to make an otherwise humdrum experience seem interesting. No harm no foul. But there it is, its a lie.
Heck, even my dog lies. He overplays the negative to get sympathy... and more food and petting.
Children lie. A lot. If you have a child, you know what I mean.
So yea, just open your mouth. That's how you can tell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Countless times when I was a kid (and sometimes now) people thought I lied when I was innocent because of timidity (and not diagnosed but maybe on the spectrum), so yeah I was unsettled. Uncontrollable smiles were the worst ("that makes you laugh!"). I can’t blame neurotypical people for having heuristics, but I’m still afraid to be interrogated in something serious with my reactions analyzed.
The article shows neurotypical people should have the same concerns. Interogators who think they know how to spot lying are usually wrong, regardless of whether they are interviewing neurotypical people or people on the spectrum. I'm not on the spectrum, but I was a rebellious kid who didn't like to take shit from teachers. My defiant and sarcastic reactions to accusations were often considered evidence that I'd done…
They open their mouths. No seriously, we all, mostly lie. Stop and think about it for a second. It could be just a simple thing to make an otherwise humdrum experience seem interesting. No harm no foul. But there it is, its a lie. Heck, even my dog lies. He overplays the negative to get sympathy... and more food and petting. Children lie. A lot. If you have a child, you know what I mean. So yea, just open your mouth.…
I disagree. That's one of the oldest falsehoods in psychology. Sure, there are some people who lie all the time, but that's more of a symptom than a universal behavior.
David Simon's book, Homicide, has an apropos section: """Terry McLarney once mused that the best way to unsettle a suspect would be to post in all three interrogation rooms a written list of those behavior patterns that indicate deception: Uncooperative. Too cooperative. Talks too much. Talks too little. Gets his story perfectly straight. Fucks his story up. Blinks too much, avoids eye contact. Doesn’t blink. Stares.…
- to know the facts
- if the person knows the facts
- and the intentions of the person
all the rest is just guesswork, woodoo.
(and yes, many times we will not know if someone is lying or not. But listening to what a person says and confirming it from independent sources could help a lot in the third of the discovery)
In short, you can't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a book, by Malcolm Gladwell. The comment said the audiobook is like a good podcast.
If it's a book by Malcolm Gladwell, I can't anti-recommend it enough. All of the Malcolm Gladwell books I've read have been tripe. Unless he has radically improved his writing and grasp of nuance in the last decade (and published retractions of his earlier books), his books are dangerous anti-knowledge which will make you feel smarter but actually be dumber. Gladwell takes an obvious, folksy thing, adds a bit of a tw…
Could you share some of the criticism against him so I could update any incorrect beliefs I may have?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty obvious that there are useful truths that don't yet meet rigorous scientific standards of evidence. Like masks being useful in a pandemic or parachutes working. Non-serious "randomised trials" have been done with parachutes, and found no measurable effect - because for safety reasons the participants only jumped from an altitude of 2 metres or something. In sports medicine there are loads of things where…
To be fair, the last wave suggests that wearing masks has no effect in this pandemic[0][1]. Comparing Sweden and Germany (which have at least similar health systems and count similarly) the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 is about the same, where Swedes rarely wear any masks and in Germany it is mandatory indoors (accessible to the public) and even mandatory in some zones outdoors. Also when you think about it, the perm…
"As a Homeland Security official told congressional investigators, “common sense” behavioral indicators are worth including in a “rational and defensible security program” even if they don’t meet academic standards of scientific evidence." What does that even mean? ... like there is a separate standard of evidence and there is a "we can get by without evidence" standard of evidence?
It's pretty obvious that there are useful truths that don't yet meet rigorous scientific standards of evidence. Like masks being useful in a pandemic or parachutes working. Non-serious "randomised trials" have been done with parachutes, and found no measurable effect - because for safety reasons the participants only jumped from an altitude of 2 metres or something. In sports medicine there are loads of things where…