What are ten instances when you should definitely trust your gut? - Barking up the wrong tree
Eric Barker stashed this in Trust
- Does someone seem extraverted and conscientious to you? You're probably right. If the person you're with is attractive you should trust your instincts about their personality even more. There are a number of things you can probably guess about someone's personality from a glance.
- Trust your gut when determining who is a nice person and who is a criminal. You can probably tell which men are dangerous and which are trustworthy. People can differentiate Nobel Prize winners from America's Most Wanted.
- Someone's face will probably tell you if they are a Republican or Democrat.
- You have a better than average chance of telling if someone is homosexual.
- With children and adults you can probably trust the vibe you get about how smart they are. It's trickier with teens and the elderly.
- If you think someone might be a psychopath, you're more likely to be right than wrong. On the flip side, do you happen to be a stone-cold psychopath? If so, trust your gut to tell you who would make a good victim.
- Even if they're not wearing Prada or a Rolex, you can probably tell who is rich.
- 6 seconds of observation will tell you who is good at their job.
- Trust your gut about whether a neighborhood is safe.
- If you listen to your partner's voice and think they might cheat on you, there's a fair chance you're right.
There's something very Malcolm Gladwell BLINK about this post.
Maybe the question should be when is it not a good idea to trust your first instinct?
Maybe that will be a future round up. :)
Ok, but my default mode in life is not only to trust my intuition, but to go with my first instinct.
Until you post that future round up. :)
While any stereotype has roots in reality, no matter how tenuous, outliers can be good as well as bad. I have serious problems with what many will take as justification for rank prejudice.
I encourage you to click through on some of the links. I don't believe most (perhaps any) of the above are based on stereotypes, In this context meaning a thin "most x are like y and statistically that is true." Most of them take root in the expression of biological differences demonstrated in scientific studies. While there is most certainly a need to be wary of the abuse of generalities we can also make no forward progress if we deny statistics, similarities and don't endeavor to explain possible root causes.
I've been doing exactly that! I love your blog.... it's like Cracked and TED had a baby. However, even tho correlative statistics back up generalities, they're exactly that... generalities. And my point is that people who are statistical outliers in one aspect, such as genius or creativity, will also be outliers in others, such as personality and social skills. Also, when people react to the perception of negative outlying traits, they're reacting to the abnormality of the trait, not the positive or negative disposition of that trait. For a person to make judgments based upon unreasoned reaction towards statistically outlying traits is definitionally prejudice, and while you might be more likely to filter out negative people, you will also filter out your geniuses and creatives and intrinsically skilled.
"like Cracked and TED had a baby."
This may be one of the greatest compliments I have ever received. :)
Thank you, Jason.
A year later I still think of your blog as the love child of Cracked and TED.
"Cracked and TED's excellent adventure..."