Comment by bryanlarsen
5 days ago
"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole." -Raylan Givens, Justified
I believe the same applies to stupid. Yes, you will occasionally run into stupid people (or as the OP states "people being stupid"). But if it happens more often than not, look in the mirror.
there are plenty of places in the world in which most people are assholes about some particular thing.
For example if you are a young black man or a gay person living in Utah you might encounter pretty much assholes all day, depending on what you are trying to do that day and depending on if you are unlucky. If you are a good Mormon person in Utah you will probably meet nothing but good people when you go out, even if you meet people who are not good Mormons.
If you are living in Denmark and taking care of a severely autistic child of about 6 years old with learning disabilities, if you meet nothing but unknown Danes during the day you are probably meeting nothing but assholes.
This really clever quote, like most really clever quotes, is somewhat insulting when it reaches its limitations.
Are frequent encounters with assholes the lucky case or the unlucky case in this instance?
>> "If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole." -Raylan Givens, Justified
> This really clever quote, like most really clever quotes, is somewhat insulting when it reaches its limitations.
The point of quotes like that are just to get people to examine their own behavior, which they often conveniently leave unexamined. This type can have more impact because it ties into the persons own observations and experience.
It's not some kind of proposition to be absolutely true or absolutely false.
Please don't besmirch Utah. It's one of the few high-trust societies left in this country. It's a beautiful, safe, peaceful haven and I literally never had a bad interaction there in years. And I'm not white.
It may be lovely, and it does seem to be beautiful and tranquil, and I can imagine it works well.
However, my views on it of late are informed by seeing the local police being at the beck and call of a dodgy businessman and making up shit to try and scare off an investigative Youtuber: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxZPfj8AlmY
The police were also so stupid, they accidentally released all their unredacted bodycam footage in their own press release, which revealed a pile of damning evidence against them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih2XwNN0aVY
It's only one incident, but it doesn't scream "high-trust society". It makes me think of other corrupt small-town police forces with a bias towards residents over outsiders.
(Oh, and I also remember another Utah resident, the guy in the Cybertruck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0Dl0TnnK0E - he has deep-seated issues and that is such a goofy vehicle. He should sell it and spend the money on therapy)
2 replies →
Well, maybe it has changed since I lived there. Nonetheless, about 11 years ago at my daughter's kindergarten I met a black guy he grew up in New York and I said I'd lived in Utah and he said he passed through there once and he remembered walking down the street, he had big dreadlocks and I guess looked alternative (the street must have been South Temple given his description) and he was freaked out about all the weird stares he got from people and how people were locking doors as he walked by, because, and I quote, he had "never experienced anything like that place" and perhaps my own feelings about Utah affected my opinion that yes, that was very like Utah.
1 reply →
however I will note, if you spend a long time in a place and situation that is not suited to you, and every time you go out you meet almost all assholes, in the end you will probably become an asshole too, because you are not going to want to approach any person you meet when you go out with any sort of social conviviality. Quite the opposite in fact, and with a probable short warning.
I saw this a lot growing up as we moved a fair amount, get out of toxic communities early if you don't want to be tainted.
Most communities we left we're for the external reasons of my Dad's job moving us around.
The only time staying is a net benefit is if your take on reality is aligned with the primary leadership.
If a situation is setup democratically and with term limits there is more leeway, so muster your arguments and vote on it early if you can, bounce if the Overton shifts further away from you after, don't have assets tied up with the group.
Decades on, every single person who stayed and fought has lost most of their ability to garden and grow beautiful things.
> For example if you are a young black man or a gay person living in Utah you might encounter pretty much assholes all day, depending on what you are trying to do that day and depending on if you are unlucky.
Are you speaking from experience? As a “brown guy with a beard,” Utah was like heaven compared to Maryland or New York. I’m so fucking sick of the mid-Atlantic “we’re not racist, we’re assholes to everybody” shtick.
someone else's experience as black.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50100397
I knew a good number of gay people, and I don't think they had it particularly easy.
As a punk rocker I was always having to fight because of how I looked, but I guess that is just for being an asshole who did not look enough like other people. Again, if you fit into Utah, it is probably a really nice place. This is probably the case about almost anywhere though.
on edit: obviously I might have had the same experiences and noticed the same experiences somewhere else. I was in Eugene Oregon from 13 to 15, Utah from 15 to mid twenties, San Francisco a couple of years, Utah, and then returned to Denmark. The only place I ever experienced assholes every time I went out was Utah, until Denmark and having a disabled child that didn't "look" disabled.
But maybe if I had lived on the East coast I would have the same observation, that you can go out all the time and meet assholes and it isn't your fault , and the implication that it is your fault is really implying that you need to change your skin color or gender preferences and you'll stop being "the asshole", which is a pretty fucked up opinion to be conveying in the nice pithy aphorism.
1 reply →
This is a strong anti-signal for me. When you work for someone who thinks every other team / counterparty we interact with is stupid / we could do their jobs / blah blah blah.. hugely demotivating behavior.
This line of thinking is common but it’s only a self serving implicit bias.
Yes, everyone around you could very well be more stupid or the bigger asshole. This is a perception issue void of evidence either way. The people most prone to poor perception analysis are those least capable of perceiving, which is the foundation of Dunning-Kruger.
For everyone else there are things like measures and accomplishments.
Just an FYI but the foundation of Dunning-Kruger is bad math/charting. The data from the experiment shows that generally people understand how good they are at things. But they charted the data on a bad variable.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-dunning-kruge...
The Dunning-Kruger effect got published because Dunning and Kruger and their reviwers were... subject to the Dunning-Kruger effect? <dies laughing>
The article misses the point.
> The worst test-takers would also overestimate their performance the most because they are simply the furthest from getting a perfect score.
No. Earlier the article correctly states that all result quadrants more or less guess their raw performance with a similar degree of precision, but fail to guess their performance relative to each other with the same level of precision. These are two entirely unrelated measures that the article attempts to correlate in an invented relationship. The actual Dunning-Kruger results also indicate the highest scoring quadrant tend to underestimate their performance relative to their testing peers, but they are off by much less than the lowest score quadrant.
I am not saying Dunning-Kruger is necessarily correct or valid, and it has been challenged repeatedly. Still it is necessary to know what Dunning-Kruger actually concludes before challenging it.
Secondly, regardless of agreement on the conclusions provided by Dunning-Kruger it does identify something more important than relative bias. People are generally better at guessing from a known, or at least determinable, objective measure than they are at guessing from perceptive qualities that includes themselves as a data point. This is the basis of social intelligence. Social intelligence is the ability to perceive the communications of other people and to introspect. Both introspection and perception of others are required for the definition of social intelligence. Social intelligence has a weak correlation to academic intelligence as it is primarily a perceptive skill (conscientiousness) but it also requires the proper motivation (openness). People with low general intelligence are more likely to score lower in social intelligence and people with lower perceptive skills in any regard are less motivated/capable to measure things for any reason, and that motivation discrepancy is dramatically elevated a person places themselves a data point of measure.
1 reply →
I like Nassim Taleb's take - the Intellectual Yet Idiot.
He needs to look in the mirror.
While not wrong, this quote assumes a healthy self-regulating society that isn't being actively driven off a cliff by algorithms optimizing everything for short-term benefits.
Meaning that it might actually be that the assholes one runs into all day are in fact assholes.
Even more so when we consider that one during a normal day does not run into a representative sample of society, but tiny tiny bubbles. We made sure to atomize everyone into that and separate the social classes from each other.
__
We can of course not expect our quotes like that to serialize all the assumed preconditions into their writing, but we should remember that those exist when replicating them.
Following aphorisms like the quote are part of how we achieve such a self regulating society.
No. Following stuff like that quote is how you run a self-regulated society and keep it self-regulating.
If however the baseline already moved into chaos, the quote just leads to tying your own hands and complacency.
It is the right prescription for the wrong disease, essentially. We need chemotherapy/surgery and not mild cough syrup.