[Dylan16807]

It's a statistical statement, so it's very easy for it to be correct.

A subgroup is either more X, less X, the same X to the limits of testing, or has too complicated a relation with X to fit into the above.

The only "absolute" aspects are things like the median and deviation. No positions are being pushed to the extreme.

Even better, "no more" covers both "less" and "same", so it's even easier for a statement like that to be correct.

[SapporoChris]

This is how I interpret the statement: "Smart people are no more resistant to it than anyone else". 'it' = being conned. 'anyone' does include the dumbest people in the world, so, "Smart people are no more resistant to being conned than the dumbest people in the world" which is enough in my opinion to falsify the absolute statement.

[Dylan16807]

I understand that interpretation but I think "anyone else" is supposed to stand in for an everyman, not the most connable person you can find.

[SapporoChris]

Thank you for your explanation.

[CoastalCoder]

I agree with your main point.

Is the term "smart people" sufficiently vague that it would need refinement for the level of certainty you're describing?

[Dylan16807]

I don't feel like it does. The more vague you make a category, the easier it is to say it's the same as the general population.