[medler]

“I found myself reflecting on how smart the average person is. Maybe they don’t know calculus. Maybe they’ll never read Ulysses. Maybe they can’t code. But they definitely know how to identify bullshit when they see it.”

How could anyone believe this? “Average” people fall for bullshit all the time.

[rngname22]

My own intuition is that there are people who call bullshit often enough that they are often wrong and falsely accuse others, and there are people who always assume the best intentions and good faith on other actors but often miss being bullshitted, but that overall the accuracy of both groups in sensing and correctly identifying bullshit or non-bullshit is commonly, universally poor, and accurate bullshit-detection is a skill that is held by a minority. And further, that someone like the author who would assess an average person as being good at detecting bullshit is likely the type that thinks everyone is bullshitting all the time (and so is in fact able to evade being bullshitted with some frequency) but also commonly falsely accuses others of bullshitting when the other is operating honestly (not to say the other might not be stupid, or selfish, or naive, or have different values, etc, but not bullshitting). If you accuse everyone of being full of shit all the time, you might avoid signing up for a predatory loan but you'll probably also burn some bridges socially that if you'd known the truth you would have mended.

[vkou]

> “Average” people fall for bullshit all the time.

Average people fall for bullshit all the time when the charismatic bullshit artist is able to control the whole setting, facts, and narrative.

The rules around a criminal trial are designed in such a way to give prosecutors plenty of opportunity to shut that down. And prosecutors are very, very experienced at playing in that arena - far moreso than even a serial bullshitter is.

Also, even if these defense measures weren't in place, there's a lot of selection bias that goes into being a victim of fraud. It's true that some kind of fraud will work on just about anybody, but no particular kind of fraud is guaranteed to work on a particular person. Jury selection is semi-random, it's not pulled from the pool of 'all people who respond affirmatively to Nigerian Prince spam-emails'.

[contravariant]

If we're derailing the discussion anyway, 'knowing' calculus and reading Ulysses is more of a matter of interest than intelligence, and being able to code covers a wide spectrum of skill.

[Jcowell]

Not really interest more so than opportunity or need. i’m willing to bet more so people know calculus because they had to (for a degree) then they wanted to

[NegativeK]

It's some gross arrogance to assume that smart people, for whatever the author thinks that even means, won't be tricked by a scam at some point in their lives.

[closewith]

I'm not even convinced intelligence generally correlates with bullshit detection.

[skybrian]

It's one thing to fall for bullshit under the right conditions (like, you want to believe) and another thing to be unable to see the bullshit when a smart prosecutor lays it out for you in detail.

[jowea]

To give one potential similar example, it seems Elizabeth Holmes' charisma made an effect on at least some of the jurors.

[SirMaster]

"How could anyone believe this?"

Because like he said, the average person is not so smart, I guess including themselves haha.

[onionisafruit]

Think of how smart the average person is. Now realize that half the world is _even smarter_. It blows my mind.

[golergka]

You're talking about median, not average.

[RationalDino]

Since IQ falls on a very good approximation to a bell curve, it's "close enough for government work".

Besides, it is a paraphrase of a well-known George Carlin quote.

[JohnFen]

> “Average” people fall for bullshit all the time.

Everyone falls for bullshit. Not all fall for the same flavor, but everyone has a flavor they'll fall for.