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

Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

wired.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#61

Post by nostrademons »

zerostar07 wrote: post #35
gmac wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is just semantics, but in my book 'aggressive' is by definition a bad thing. For the traits you cite I'd go with 'assertive' and/or 'self-assured'.

I think it's a good term, given that the opposite is passive. Why is it a bad thing by definition?

The opposite of aggressive is passive. Both are bad. What you want to be is assertive, which is the middle road where you look out for your own interests while still respecting others.

There're a bunch of other situations where both extremes are bad. The opposite of indifferent is obsessed, and both are negative qualities in a relationship - you want to be involved. The opposite of flat is sharp, and both are bad - you want to be in tune. The opposite of hypo-anything is hyper-anything, and both are bad - you want to be healthy.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#62

Post by tfb »

forensic wrote: post #27
scott_w wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I can't cite any studies, Richard Dawkins presents some of the theory in The Selfish Gene. While total "nice guys" tend to finish last in a population of "bad guys", a localised population of "fool me once guys" can, given time, push out the "bad guys", and become a dominant population. This works when the benefits of working together outweigh the benefits of screwing over the other guy. While a population of b…

So much faith. Which evolutionary strategy succeeds is entirely dependent on the environment. Capitalism and the modern metropolis is the perfect environment for sociopaths to thrive, and research on sociopathy shows it is increasing in the West. The simple fact of the matter is that when a sociopath is discovered, the discoverer will avoid the sociopath but WILL NOT WARN OTHERS due to fear of retaliation. Fear keeps…

The simple fact of the matter is that when a sociopath is discovered, the discoverer will avoid the sociopath but WILL NOT WARN OTHERS due to fear of retaliation.

This is false.

Nothing bothers me more than people making statements as if they are fact, especially with no evidence whatsoever.

I am living evidence of the opposite of your statement.

I played in a band professionally for a few years, and got to learn a few sociopaths very well: my ex-bandmates, of course, some worse than others. There came a point where I could not idly stand by while they manipulated and harmed unknowing people day after day. Not all of it was terrible but it really adds up after a while.

So I decided to leave the band, and the night before the last show on a tour, I let everyone in the band know exactly what I thought of them; and after I left, I told all of their friends and some fans who wanted to know why I left what they had been doing to people.

There was no fear of retaliation. And to this day, a year and a half later, no attempt at retaliation has been made.

I'm not aggressive, but I am dominant. Aggressiveness, sociopathy, and dominance do not go hand in hand.

My old band has accomplished nothing since I left, and I bet they've learned a little something from the experience. We may not be able to lynch sociopaths anymore, but we can sure teach them lessons if we use our brains and refuse to put up with it. Calling them out on any and every occasion is probably the best thing one can do.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#63

Post by re_todd »

pmuhar wrote: post #9

I never understood how bad boys/aggressive business people succeed. I always go out of my way to help people that are genuinely nice and caring, and not so much for the jerks.

The bad guys I've known were could be very charming when it mattered or to the right people. It took several months (sometimes a year) for people to compare notes and realize they were basically jerks. One of the nicest guys I've ever met I later found out verbally abused (and sometimes physically abused) his wife, often stole money from her purse to go get high, left his kids in a seedy part of town because he was too high to remember where they were, and spread many horrible, demonstrably false rumors when they separated. Maybe some of the people you helped because you thought they were nice, many years from now, you will realized they are sociopaths.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#64

Post by shmerl »

kristofferR wrote: post #25

It's a shame that people still think it's impossible to be aggressive without being a jerk, both in business and social life. Sure, a lot of jerks are aggressive, but that's only a correlation, not a causation. "Nice" is not a positive thing. If someone calls you "nice" it's a sign you should change your personality. "Nice" is what you say about people you have nothing to say about: http://www.joelrunyon.com/two3/nic…

Depends on what you understand by "aggressive". Energetic, active, pushing for opportunities and so on? Or being cruel, damaging to others and not caring about side effects for the sake of the goal?

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#65

Post by shmerl »

zerostar07 wrote: post #35
gmac wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is just semantics, but in my book 'aggressive' is by definition a bad thing. For the traits you cite I'd go with 'assertive' and/or 'self-assured'.

I think it's a good term, given that the opposite is passive. Why is it a bad thing by definition?

No, opposite of passive is active. What does it have to do with aggressive?

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#66

Post by billpatrianakos »

rhizome wrote: post #42
kristofferR wrote: post #25

It's a shame that people still think it's impossible to be aggressive without being a jerk, both in business and social life. Sure, a lot of jerks are aggressive, but that's only a correlation, not a causation. "Nice" is not a positive thing. If someone calls you "nice" it's a sign you should change your personality. "Nice" is what you say about people you have nothing to say about: http://www.joelrunyon.com/two3/nic…

Sure, a lot of jerks are aggressive, but that's only a correlation, not a causation. That's nice in theory, but there are a lot of people with dysfunctional upbringings for whom "jerks" provide the only role models for success.

I'm someone who had such an upbringing and my male model (my father) was a jerk (the rest of the world called him an asshole). He was very successful in business and I always wanted to model that success for myself. The funny thing is, I actually turned out exactly opposite of him and it was because of his jerk-ness that it happened. Though he tried to make me in his image his fatal mistake was treating me like the rest of the world. Instead of learning how to be the boss like him I learned how to fear the boss and be passive, nice, agreeable, and generally like a door mat.

So I may have misunderstood what you were trying to say but what I thought you meant to say was that those who have been brought up by assholes end up being assholes themselves. I disagree and I'm living proof. The person being brought up like that wants to develop those "jerk" traits that make their parent(s) successful but they end up getting developing habits like pleasing people and following orders without question that get in the way of what they want to do.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#67

Post by billpatrianakos »

tfb wrote: post #62
forensic wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much faith. Which evolutionary strategy succeeds is entirely dependent on the environment. Capitalism and the modern metropolis is the perfect environment for sociopaths to thrive, and research on sociopathy shows it is increasing in the West. The simple fact of the matter is that when a sociopath is discovered, the discoverer will avoid the sociopath but WILL NOT WARN OTHERS due to fear of retaliation. Fear keeps…

The simple fact of the matter is that when a sociopath is discovered, the discoverer will avoid the sociopath but WILL NOT WARN OTHERS due to fear of retaliation. This is false. Nothing bothers me more than people making statements as if they are fact, especially with no evidence whatsoever. I am living evidence of the opposite of your statement. I played in a band professionally for a few years, and got to learn a f…

I don't doubt that was the case for you but that's one personal experience. When it comes to a subject like sociopaths we're dealing with people and there are no absolutes when it comes to behavior so while in your case it might be false the majority of cases may not be. The OP is taking a lot of flack for not citing a source but I saw he cited a book at the very beginning, said he had done extensive research, and to me it was pretty clear that his entire comment was based on that source mentioned in the first few sentences. I think we should lay off. I really don't think he's just coming in here to make stuff up. We are just discussing things, it's not a peer review. I give him the benefit of the doubt here.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#68

Post by MarkMc »

To my mind Warren Buffett is the classic case of good-guy-finishing-first. Think of all the 'alpha' males in finance; investment bankers, traders, hedge fund managers and private equity partners. He's beaten them all, simply by doing what he loves and being a nice guy.

For example, from Buffett's 1985 letter to shareholders [1]: "I won’t close down businesses of sub-normal profitability merely to add a fraction of a point to our corporate rate of return."

I recommend reading the complete section in that letter headed 'Shutdown of Textile Business' - it shows just how painful it was for him to liquidate that business.

[1] http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/1985.html

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#69

Post by Drbble »

MarkMc wrote: post #68

To my mind Warren Buffett is the classic case of good-guy-finishing-first. Think of all the 'alpha' males in finance; investment bankers, traders, hedge fund managers and private equity partners. He's beaten them all, simply by doing what he loves and being a nice guy. For example, from Buffett's 1985 letter to shareholders [1]: "I won’t close down businesses of sub-normal profitability merely to add a fraction of a…

Warren Buffet made his first significant money through research and basically anonymous buying and selling. He was an original quant. He isn't an executive of the sort that signs deals and negotiates and clawed his way to the top socially. By the time he was personally dealing with executives, he was already the richest most powerful one in the room.

Re: Nice guys finish first. Eventually.

#70

Post by wisty »

oz wrote: post #32

"Despite the early appeal of the jerks, however, in the end the girls realised that they were better off marrying the nice guys. " There is a meme within the 'manosphere' that women spend their best years (youth) enjoying themselves with alpha males, and then settle with a beta provider when they realize that alpha males won't commit to them, while their looks are fading and their biological clocks are ticking. If gi…

Isn't the stereo-typical Lieutenant is a nice guy, while the stereo-typical Sergeant is an alpha male?
Post reply on HN