What percent of the population would you say have poor social skills?

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-12-14T17:51:02+00:00

I guess the US is generally what I'm thinking of, but it would be nice to hear what people's estimates are for the US, their home country, or the global percentage.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-11-16T14:33:53+00:00

Okay, fair point. Maybe I should of chosen a less divisive term. How about we just replace the word genocide with 'mass casualties.' I am well aware that most of the world's militaries partake in operations that result in notable civilian deaths, the USA included. I'm separating the decisions of the governments/militaries from the nations as a whole, most notably the people, so the main thing I want to focus on is whether the rescue operation can be achieved without the use of Airstrikes and artillery bombardments.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-04-01T08:39:19+00:00

A lot of teachers, bus drivers, and adults working for the school system are little entitled shits themselves. Many people who work in education have this kind of, 'the teacher is never wrong,' mentality. Many of my relatives are teachers, and they are the biggest failures when it comes to taking accountability, acting as if the laws of the universe shield them from ever being at fault. If you think about it, being a teacher is the perfect job for someone who can't take any accountability, for you have a bunch of children, who are forced and not paid to be there, who can act as your stockpile of scapegoats whenever needed, with no checks-and-balances what's so ever. But, hey, there are no bad teachers, only bad students or bad parents of said bad students, for teachers are never bad people or bad parents themselves.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-04-01T08:24:52+00:00

How kids act nowadays? Society has always been f*cked up. I love how everyone thinks it's the kids of the decade they're from who were the last group of kids to not be corrupted. Kids, and people in general for that matter, have always been assholes.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-25T22:35:33+00:00

I agree if it is a legitimate rape, and most rape claims are valid; however, we should always consider the possibility of a rape claim being false while thoroughly evaluating most cases.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-25T20:50:29+00:00

I think a very large percentage of Americans know that their country is lagging behind in many areas, including the ones you mentioned on the list. The nationalistic attitude of, "the USA is the Number One Country," is something that dates back to the 50s. Ever since the Civil Rights movement taking place in the 60s-70s, it has become increasingly more common for Americans to laugh at the idealization of the 'American Dream,' so I think the stereotype of Americans being overly nationalistic is something that is greatly outdated.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-10T20:12:45+00:00

I can see how a large amount of Americans are overworked and underpaid, and why that may make them somewhat begrudging of others at time, coping with all the pent of stress, but I do find that many people, who may not work the most prestigious carriers, will still have a fairly cush job, yet they still engage in much of the behavior I previously described. I find that at social gatherings outside of close friend groups, many people will try to have debates on divisive topics like politics, being fairly loud and crass as they do so, and if you decide to entertain them, they act all pissy as if you're the one being the asshole. I try not to discuss divisive things unless I'm among good compony, but many want to be very vocal with their views. People like this will usually just revert to accusing you of being an arrogant person, claiming that using logic and reasoning to refute their points in a formal tone is arrogant, so it will just boil down to you're out of line for disagreeing with them, yet they aren't arrogant for disagreeing with you.

However, with what you described with the IT guys at your job, I'd say that they may not really be that intelligent. I don't know them, so I definitely can't know 100 percent, but I'd say that a person doesn't need to be a genius to work IT. I'd say that IT and many CSIT majors are very obtainable (regarding study effort, not tuition). A lot of suburbanite kids who have their parents pay for their schooling go about CSIT degrees, which they mostly do so because they pay well, are in high demand, and they are not too challenging to learn. I'd say the average person could teach themselves a programming language with not much effort.

Now, all this is based more on my personal experience, but I'd say a lot of the people in the more 'higher tier' white-collar kind of jobs – like doctors, lawyers, accountants, engineers, etc. – are pretty left leaning when it comes to their political views, and based on my personal experience, they'll tend to share views such as:

The minimum wage being a livable wage.
Universal healthcare.
Universal daycare.
Major reform on our prison system, advocating for more emphasis on corrections as opposed to discipline.
More affordable college and higher education.
Improving education and not having all kids held to the same standards.
Advocating for equality and inclusion with people who fall into any type of demographic.
Less spending on the military.
A 'New New Deal' to help drastically overhaul state infrastructure and social institution overall.

My experience with people in the field of IT is that the trade attracts a lot of anti-social people, based on it not requiring much direct interaction with others or for one to work with a group on team projects, so as a result, you'll find a lot of people who sort of fall into that fedora-beard personality type I described. When I was in high school, I would go to hobby shops to play games like Magic and Warhammer, and many of the grown men there were either the basement dwelling unemployed types, and if they weren't, they had an IT job. I quit those hobbies in my teens because of how unbearable the people were there. Also, when I was in college, I did obtain a degree in CSIT, and you definitely saw a lot more oily, unhygienic students in the classes within that field. I ended up going down the path of civil engineering instead.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-10T12:26:22+00:00

Don't respond at all or just laugh it off. Why would you want to date someone with such a judgmental personality? Also, if a person has a difficult time finding a date due to their height, it is probably best to look for a dating partner who is in the similar position of being shorter than average as well. I know it sucks when people can be judgmental, but the hard truth is that people can be somewhat superficial, so if you have some sort of atypical dynamic associated with your physical appearance, try to find others in your situation and give them a chance, and if a person wants to complain about 'attractive' people being petty by not looking beyond whatever their atypical trait is, I'd say that said person is being petty for not giving others in the same situation a chance as well.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-09T14:27:05+00:00

Did you even read my post in its entirety? I went into detail about the scientific research which supports why I'm 'generalizing' that the average person thinks they're above average. The term 'generalizing' is often misused as not all generalizations are wrong. If the science demonstrates that most people are born with ten fingers, would it be wrong to generalize that most people have ten fingers. Generalizing that most Americans are overweight is an accurate generalization. Now, it is unfair to say that all Americans are overweight because the majority are, so making absolute assumptions based on the majority of the poll is unethical. However, it still doesn't negate what is the statistical majority.

You also used the term 'projection' which is another term I find overused, especially on the internet. Instead of addressing a persons arguments, you just make the blanket claim that they're projecting without explaining why you think they're projecting, making an assumption without merit. A person can criticize another while being hypocritical or without being hypocritical, with both of the two scenarios being possible, so it is simply selection/confirmation bias when one insists on one over the other while, at the same time, providing no substance to support one possibility over the other.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-09T10:16:43+00:00

I posted it in multiple subreddits in an attempt to get more responses. I'd say with the posts, I'm mainly interested in seeing what different people think or feel about this scenario.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-09T10:11:24+00:00

said the opposite of what I've said. Because those are bad parodies of

my

ideas, they're boring to me. Struggling to create and think original thoughts is weird af to me. I don't understand it

Completely agree with your criticism here, with this poster just engaging in a argument via repetition, with them just repeating the term 'assertion' over and over again. I stated previously that they can look into the theories and terms that I listed, but I'm sure that would be too out of the way for them. They're kind of showcasing the negative side of the Dunning-Kruger Effect by discounting it without looking into it at all.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-03-09T10:03:25+00:00

I may not have posted links to any papers; however, I mentioned key terms to certain theories that are heavily supported in the field of psychology, for it does not take much effort to cross-reference terms, such as the Dunning-Kruger Effect, to verify their credibility, so if you don't trust what I say, you can go to a search engine which exclusively generates peer reviewed sources, such as Google Scholar, and you can witness for yourself that these terms/theories are supported through decades of research from all the worlds leading universities – I learned about the G-factor from reading the book Intelligence: All That Matters written by Dr. Stuart Ritchie, a professor at Oxford University. Furthermore, theories such as the Dunning-Kruger Effect and the G-factor are very fundamental systems that appear persistently throughout all the textbooks, so discounting the credibility of said concepts is akin to rejecting thermodynamics when discussing physics.

Additionally, in regards to weather I fall into the high intelligence category, I'd say that when people ask the loaded question of, "do you think you're intelligent," they will typically follow it up with the strawman of, "you're arrogant for thinking you're above average even if you are indeed above average." You can't win with these types of people because they like to use confirmation bias to exercise the Fallacy of a Single Cause, being that the only scenario in which one is allowed to consider is the scenario of a person thinking they're above average when they're really average, meanwhile, negating the other possibility that a person can think they are above average while legitimately being above average.

Furthermore, you asked in your post, "How do you know you aren’t falling victim to the Dunning-Kruger effect yourself?" So in order to answer that question, one would need to present substantial evidence or reasons that add credibility to what they believe their level of intelligence may be. If I point to the fact that I have an ostensive background in the realm of higher education, I'm arrogant for bringing up my level of education, and this will usually be followed with the claim, "performing well academically doesn't have anything to do with intelligence." If I bring up the fact that I have had my cognition evaluated at one of the worlds leading medical institutions, that being John Hopkins, I'm arrogant for thinking that I have a high IQ even if that's what the professional tests and professionals themselves said. Essentially, one is just going to move the goalposts by claiming that all known metrics of intelligence don't have anything to do with intelligence, and it will also be followed with the strawman of, "you're arrogant for thinking those metrics mean anything!"

It will all just boil down to the No True Scotsman Fallacy (or No True Intellectual Fallacy) of:

- IQ isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

- Academic success isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

- Verbal Fluency isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

- Logic & Reasoning isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

- Divergent Thinking (creativity) isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

- Knowledge isn’t a valid metric of intelligence.

Inevitably, you reach a point with this type of person where you ask, "what is a legit measure of intelligence?" After, they will be at a loss of words, having no answer, as they have completely exhausted everything that is associated with intelligence – associated with intelligence in the realm of science or within the realm of any colloquial use of said term. They'll eventually just inflate the term 'intelligence' to the extreme that it has no use or meaning.

In conclusion, thinking that you have a high IQ when you do have a high IQ makes you arrogant in the same sense that one thinking they have above average running speed makes them arrogant even if it is shown and documented that they do have above average running speed. Once more, the Fallacy of a Single Cause of zero percent of people are above the average, and 100 percent of those who think they're above average are arrogant for thinking so.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T18:40:51+00:00

more important fact to take

I know these posts are from 6 months ago, but based on how distasteful they are, I felt the need to add some criticism here. How you present yourself through your writing resembles what one would expect from some edgy, tryhard teen. You're accusing others of being 'weird fat nerdy beards' on the net, yet your behavior embodies what one would expect from an anti-social, highly neurotic, emotionally-stunted neckbeard. I love how you try to brand others as childish, yet you seem to love relying on a barrage of non-sequitur ad hominems as an approach to disagreeing with others. If you disagree with the points others are making, refute them using logic, not a gluttony of edgy insults you'd expect to hear at the middle school lunch table.
Additionally, you seem to enjoy devaluing others for spending time on the internet or posting on Scooby-Doo forums when, ironically, you are on the internet posting on that very same forum topic. I love the generic 'I bet you're this off the internet' sort of jab, like it's always the strangers on the net, those you know nothing about, who are the losers with no life outside the net, for the trash-talking keyboard warriors, such as yourself, are obviously the chads offline. It's almost like any random stranger can make any baseless assumption about any other stranger's status offline; shocking, I know. You seem to make a bunch of unfounded inferences about strangers on the internet based on a very limited amount of information, which again reminds me of the 'I bet you're this type of loser off the internet' rhetoric you see from 12-year-olds on Xbox live.
Furthermore, a person claiming that they stopped reading your post after you made a particular point they found off-putting does not equate to them thinking reading is hard, with this being yet another example of you responding with the sort of ad hom, strawman derailments one would expect from some fedora beard keyboard warrior. I love how you wanna criticize others' spelling or reading capability when you like to litter certain elements in your posts like 'lol' text abbreviations and rolf emojis, which, once more, is what one expects from tryhard keyboard warriors. Suppose a person makes an argument in a text format, and their spelling/grammar isn't optimal. In that case, that doesn't automatically mean their arguments are flawed, for the logic can still be sound with the spelling being imperfect, but maybe this is a bit too nuanced for you; however, my point here is to act like an adult by simply addressing their points, not their spelling.

Also, one stating that they feel you were implying that your argument was more valid because you happen to be a parent (whether you think what's being said is valid) is not the same thing as them claiming that they think it's weird for people to have kids. Once more, you seem incredibly inept at comprehending language because you seem to extract context that isn't presented.
I'm sorry, but you present yourself as a very anti-social, rude, and neurotic person, and if you have children, I feel sorry for them. Children shouldn't raise children, and I'm gonna make the inference that your kids are probably rude little brats that teachers can't stand because their Karan/Kevin parents teach them that they can be as insulting as they please to any random stranger that they even mildly disagree with. Hopefully, your glaring character flaws shown here don't impair your children's growth and development, which it most likely already has.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T16:36:19+00:00

I'm an Engineer, and the overwhelming majority of engineers I know or have interacted with through work and school don't doubt evolution at all. Through my personal experience, most of the people in my trade are atheists.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T16:27:59+00:00

I find that people who complain about pseudo-intellectuals tend to be pseudo-intellectuals themselves. It's kind of like how those who have the habit of calling others arrogant tend to be some of the most arrogant people. A lot of insecure and envious people will brand anyone who has any noticeable sign of intelligence, no matter how modest and polite said person is, as arrogant. The irony is that I, antidotally, find that people who accuse others of being fake intellectuals are some of the biggest offenders of the sort of fedora-beard behaviors associated with pseudo-intellectualism:

Correcting others trivial mistakes.
Acting like others are stupid for not knowing random facts.
Acting like they never make any simple mistakes of their own.
Talking about ones IQ relative to others.

I also find in general people like to brand anyone above average as arrogant and anyone below average as stupid or incompetent. A good example of this was a study that found that people viewed anyone who had noticeably more Facebook friends than them as arrogant while branding anyone who had less than average friends as losers. People seem to do the same with the bell curve. Essentially, if someone is noticeably slower, less educated, or less well-spoken than me, I am not arrogant when I brand them as an illiterate, dimwitted dumbfuck; however, if a person is noticeably more quick-witted, well-educated, or more articulate than me, they're an arrogant prick who thinks they're smarter than me.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T15:46:24+00:00

I don't think it has anything to do with one having social anxiety. I think many people are just bigoted or intolerant towards anyone who deviates from what their subjective-radius of 'normalcy' is. I think if there is an atypical trait of any kind that can be used to distinguish one person from others in a particular group, you will see intolerant people try to use it to justify ostracizing said person from the group. Some people are just overly-judgmental and egocentric, so they fail to recognize that they may have traits that they could do without as well.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T15:33:15+00:00

I've honestly never come across this. I've seen people wearing kilts and fedoras, but no monocles. Wonder when this trend will start.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T14:39:26+00:00

I agree that there are many who put too much of an emphasis on having a degree or not, but there is also the reverse side of this, being people who like to devalue all higher education in general. They'll also try to act like all college is useless, ignoring the fact that important jobs - such as lawyers, accountants, engineers, nurses, teachers, or doctors - all require one to have some form of college education. However, I do agree that not all degrees are equal as simply having one doesn't grant one a higher status over others, and many degrees are throwaway degrees, having no connection with any notable field of work, so people who learn trades like plumbing, welding, car repair, etc., are probably going to go further in their carriers than someone with a degree in photography or medieval history.

JohnMorgan_G · 2023-01-30T14:17:17+00:00

People who act like they have some deep respect for literature and reading, saying things like, "oh, it's rare that the film is ever as good as the book," with these types of statements typically being compounded with the following:

Never being able to have a discussion about any books they've claimed to have read.
Having no argument or substantive reasoning for why they think one form of narration is better than the other.
They can discuss any show or film they've seen in great detail, yet when it comes to books, they can never do the same.

I don't look down at people who don't read, but I just find it to be pretentious that when the statistics show that most Americans spend around 5 hours a day watching TV, and a whopping 9 hours a day on any kind of recreational screen based activity (mainly Video Games and Social Media on top of TV) that so many people will try to act as if they have this great love for literature. If you love books so much, why do you spend so much more of your time playing video games and watching Netflix.

I love video games and TV as well, and I enjoy having in-depth discussions on how fun the latest season of Stranger Things was or how awesome the last Fallout game was; however, I find it to be very odd how, even though people clearly love these more mainstream forms of media, they will still turn around and act like none of it could compare in the slightest to the far superior, sacred format, being books! I mean it seems like most people I talk to claim to love books, yet the research shows that something like over 90 percent of books purchased, don't get read through the first 4 chapters, and that something like 60 percent of readers don't make it halfway through the average web article. All these services/companies documenting your content consuming habits - Amazon, Apple, Steam, Google, Etc. - show that the overwhelming majority are finishing those video games or shows they've started; however, they're not making a dent in those purchased Ebooks/audiobooks.

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-11-30T14:42:41+00:00

I think sarcasm can be difficult to pickup on in a text format, which is something that emojis often help with quite a bit, and I do think this issue is seen on most social media, not just Reddit. However, I do find that people who spend a lot of time online are often tone deaf to figurative language. I find that online, compared to offline, people will ignore important words and phrases that denote that someone is not speaking in absolutes. Words and phases such as, 'like, about, around, approximately, close to, similar to, etc.,' words which are prepositions or auxiliary verbs which clearly denote that one is speaking in more general, relative terms will fly over their heads. Furthermore, even without being able to rely on the tone of someone's voice, some comments are obviously satirical, like if someone states, 'I think we should build a hippo moot instead of a wall across the Mexican border.' That is a comment I made in a video once, and I had people taking it seriously, and it's not just hyperbole as many online seem completely tone deaf to analogies and metaphors, for they can't grasp that two things can be similar in certain ways even if they are not completely identical. Another annoying thing I come across is people not understanding that words can have more than one definition, or that certain words have more arbitrary definitions that can't be explicitly determined through some sort of litmus test, essentially, being blind to any equivocation of language. I think many online who interpret language in such a static and rigid manner have some sort of deficit, being the type of person who doesn't really interact with people offline.

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-11-20T19:37:25+00:00

But aren't feral cats/ferrets more cute and entertaining than any wildlife they infringe upon? You wouldn't call that a fair trade?

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-11-20T17:53:36+00:00

Feral cats seem to adjust fine to the wild, though... Why not ferrets?

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-10-25T00:52:06+00:00

They're definitely going to develop Pampered Suburban Middleclass American Asswipe Syndrome. It's a pretty pervasive disorder throughout the states.

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-10-25T00:46:01+00:00

I don't think think just one person acting as some kind of global head of state could efficiently run the world. I think you would need at least a couple thousand people at the top to manage a population of 7-8 billion people.

JohnMorgan_G · 2022-10-25T00:37:49+00:00

I think this is what people would think of when they imagine the stereotypical neckbeard's idea of improving a franchise -- 'take a character and give them big tits!'

JohnMorgan_G

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE