Short people are evil - according to science

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 26
Topic's author
#1
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10

Science says: 

"People who are relatively short and those who wish to be taller tend to have more “Dark Triad” traits, according to new research published in Personality and Individual Differences."

"The Dark Triad refers to a set of three related personality traits: psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism. Psychopathy is characterized by a lack of empathy and remorse, impulsivity, and a disregard for social norms and rules. Narcissism is characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, entitlement, and a need for admiration. Machiavellianism refers to a tendency to be manipulative, cynical, and lacking in morality."


"shorter people and those who wished to be taller tended to exhibit more psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism."


"Shorter people, especially those who wish they were taller, are more characterized by traits that are likely to make them show-off, be confrontational, and interested in power,” said Jonason, the author of “Shining Light on the Dark Side of Personality.."


"But why would shorter people tend to have more dark traits? The researchers said that “these relationships may be best understood from an evolutionary framework, suggesting that when people cannot be physically formidable, they may then be psychologically formidable instead."

"When individuals are physically smaller or weaker, they may use psychological tactics to compensate for this. For example, shorter men may demand respect, acquire resources, and impress romantic partners with their personality traits, while shorter women may use deception to appear more desirable or gain protection and resources. These psychological tactics may provide advantages in survival and mating, and may offset physical disadvantages."
#2
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Anyone given any reason to be envious or resentful is in danger of becoming a shitty person. I know twin brothers, one a very handsome lad, the other uglier. You can just feel the contempt on the uglier twin. I guess it's just easier to be a good person when you never had a reason to hate.

Lots of woman hate on here. Small wonder really. 
#3
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
I read a thing before that suggested that people born with their eyes closer together are more scheming to make up for their reduced range of vision. Not sure I buy it tbh. It's way easier to explain it as a result of envy, resentfulness, what have you.
Topic's author
#4
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@badger
Anyone given any reason to be envious or resentful is in danger of becoming a shitty person.
Well, the shittiness comes easily.
Person gets bullied and dared by his parents and peers for a long time, so being a shitty person from that standpoint is easy, natural.
#5
Elliott
Elliott's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 407
2
2
6
Elliott's avatar
Elliott
2
2
6
Interesting, I suppose anyone who is dissatisfied with their body image can develop feelings of inadequacy and that can lead to animosity towards others. I think it can also drive people towards success by way of compensation.
#6
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
Women are shorter. I have always argued that women are more socially adept (manipulative) for the reasons they have to be to compensate for lack of physical strength.
#7
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,509
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Women are nore agreeable because of the low levels of testosterone according to Dr. Peterson. Testosterone is what makes the difference.
#8
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@IlDiavolo
These things don't have to be mutually independent. Perhaps evolutionary processes caused them to have less testosterone, making them more agreeable. 

  
#9
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,509
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
... and be shorter than men.
#10
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@badger
I read a thing before that suggested that people born with their eyes closer together are more scheming 
OMG, that is Putin!

#11
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@FLRW
Never mind Putin. It's Greyparrot. 
Topic's author
#12
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@IlDiavolo
Women are nore agreeable because of the low levels of testosterone according to Dr. Peterson.
Women change their behavior based on a situation. 

Usually, their basic pattern of thought function is:
"Make a bunch of mistakes" then "cry and blame everyone else for those mistakes".

If a woman is stronger or in a better position, she will use force as she pleases. The examples of this are women beating their children all the time.

However, when in a situation where strength is insufficient, women have to use lies and distractions and even kindness in order to function properly. So they have to use words and be convincing, so to say.

If those dont work, then they have to be submissive.

Really simple set of options: Forcing, convincing or being submissive.

Due to women being physically weaker, they often have to resort to convincing or being submissive, since forcing someone is not an option if you are physically weaker and in bad position. They are good at convincing and being submissive, which is no surprise given so much practice and experience.

This does not change the fact that women are likely to use force when they are physically stronger or in better position, as proven by billions of examples worldwide.
#13
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,509
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
Where the heck did you get all this bullshit? Women beating their children all the time? 😆

I'm not sure if you're a boy or a girl, but according to my experience women are usually far sensitive than men, especially when its comes to kids, there is a sort of mother's instinct. I saw women crying because of a someone else's child.

I know there might be women that are mean and insensitive, but it's a low percentage. There are women that are not meant to be mothers because they are incapable of give love and care.

As for the manipulative behaviour of women, that's a complete different story that has nothing to do with their sensitive nature.
Topic's author
#14
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@IlDiavolo
Where the heck did you get all this bullshit? Women beating their children all the time? 😆
Are you implying its not true?


but according to my experience women are usually far sensitive than men, especially when its comes to kids
I dont see what your experience or their sensitivity has to do with anything. Are you implying they are "more sensitive", so they wont beat their kids? If you are implying that, then you would be wrong since "being sensitive" is not present in women. Even if it was present, it does not prevent them from "beating their children". Women are not "sensitive". They use their children to brag around, and often shame their children and compare their children to other as if children were private property. Most of them beat their children when its not socially disapproved. We see this even in female animals. 


I saw women crying because of a someone else's child.
So you are basing your opinion on irrelevant example of one woman seeking attention to make opinion about 4 billion women?
In that case, I will base my opinion on seeing countless women beat their children to support my opinion of women beating their children.


I know there might be women that are mean and insensitive, but it's a low percentage.
Is a false statement. A simple google search on statistics would have fixed your incorrect opinion. Even in Sweden, before it became illegal, beating children was approved by over 70% of women. Thats not exactly "a small percentage".

This supports my claim that women will likely use force on their children unles someone acts to prevent them.
#15
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
  • Evil is a religious judgement and never a scientific conclusion. 
    • Psychologists don't ever refer to subjects as evil.
  • For their study, the researchers used Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to recruit 367 adults from the United States. The participants completed the Dirty Dozen Dark Triad questionnaire, a standardized assessment of subclinical psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism. The researchers also asked the participants to report their actual height and the extent to which they agreed with the statements “I wish I were taller” and “I am satisfied with my height.”
  • So our data set is limited to US citizens with an online profile of sufficient depth for a digital retailer to find worthy of recruitment, people with the time and incliniation to volunteer for an online survey- so we are already heavily skewing towards white, affluent, relatively inactive or underemployed people. Judging by social media, isn't psychopathy and narcissism already strongly over-represented in the anonymity of online populations?
    • Let's note there is no fact checking mechanism for the anonymous replies.  
    • Is less than 400 online Americans really sufficient to start making generalizations about all short humans?
      • I'd be willing to agree that Americans skew towards narcissism generally.
    • Even though I am slightly taller than average (and grateful to be so) I would still answer yes to "wishing I was taller" if only for basketball games.   Any woman who wears high heels wishes she was taller.   Researchers seem to be diagnosing, not just short people, but the majority of all people.

#16
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,509
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
So you are basing your opinion on irrelevant example of one woman seeking attention to make opinion about 4 billion women?
In that case, I will base my opinion on seeing countless women beat their children to support my opinion of women beating their children.
No, it's based on a long experience in my life. I'm not a kid, I saw enough to be categorical in this matter. But even so, science has plenty of evidence about the agreeableness and sensitivity of women, just type it in Google and you'll see a lot of research about it. That explains for example that women prefer health care jobs than men.

What I don't see though is the source of all the bullshit you're throwing. I bet you have nothing that supports your statement.

Is a false statement. A simple google search on statistics would have fixed your incorrect opinion. Even in Sweden, before it became illegal, beating children was approved by over 70% of women. Thats not exactly "a small percentage".
You said "a woman that beats children all the time", it reads like a woman that enjoys beating children. So, no, women usually beat their children to correct them, which is wrong by current standards, of course. My mom used to slap my ass when I did terrible things, but that doesnt make her a bad woman, she was just taught the old way to grow a child.
Topic's author
#17
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@oromagi
Evil is a religious judgement and never a scientific conclusion.
Is a false claim. As long as "evil" has a definition that can be confirmed through observation, such confirmation is a scientific conclusion.
If we define "evil" as "manipulation", then the observation of manipulation is an observation of evil.
If you think that evil has no definition(which would be your opinion), then you cannot possibly have a moral system nor confirm evil through observation.


Psychologists don't ever refer to subjects as evil.
Is called an assumption. You are trying to separate "scientists" from "evil" as if scientists cannot observe "evil" based on fixed definitions.
Further, to claim that psychologists dont call something evil when it is observably evil is in itself a nonsense since psychology has a whole list of "inappropriate and appropriate behaviors" and they update the list every day. It doesnt matter if they change the word "evil" to "inappropriate", both words are describing something that "we really dont want".


So our data set is limited to US citizens with an online profile of sufficient depth for a digital retailer to find worthy of recruitment, people with the time and incliniation to volunteer for an online survey- so we are already heavily skewing towards white, affluent, relatively inactive or underemployed people. Judging by social media, isn't psychopathy and narcissism already strongly over-represented in the anonymity of online populations?
I was surprised that any study on this was even done in the first place.
Most people in the USA have internet and use it often, so I wouldnt say that there is more US psychopaths in their online population than offline. People in real world hide their psychopathic traits more, but its still there.


Let's note there is no fact checking mechanism for the anonymous replies.
In studies like these, the only fact check would be if people were actually short or faking it. You cannot go around and follow people to check if they are manipulative, immoral...ect.


Is less than 400 online Americans really sufficient to start making generalizations about all short humans?
400 is a solid number to make a general conclusion when its the only data we have. I might just google to see if there are more studies on short people.


Even though I am slightly taller than average (and grateful to be so) I would still answer yes to "wishing I was taller" if only for basketball games.
Well, I dont know about you, but I was short as a kid and I grew up to be a mean person.
Now, the study obviously compared data to the data of people who didnt wish they were taller. Also, I believe that wishing to be taller wasnt the only variable.


  Any woman who wears high heels wishes she was taller.
I believe the study is saying that men have greater problems with being short. Women are less affected.


 Researchers seem to be diagnosing, not just short people, but the majority of all people
Are most people short and wish they were taller?
Topic's author
#18
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@IlDiavolo
women usually beat their children to correct them
Since you agree with my claim of women usually beating children, there is nothing for me to respond to anymore, since my claim was that women usually beat their children.
#19
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Being tall has benefits, that is why some short people(possibly including me) would probably like to be taller than they are.

However, I don’t see a reasonable correlation. Until there is actual scientific basis intrinsically explaining how being short makes you evil, I will regard this a coincidence or even experimental variation not suitable for rejecting the null hypothesis.
#20
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Oh actually, even if these are intrinsically explained, it doesn’t make them “evil”. I mean, would you call RM evil?
Topic's author
#21
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Intelligence_06
However, I don’t see a reasonable correlation.
Science is based on statistics and observations, not on "reasonable correlations". In fact, "reasonable correlations" are mostly for the religious people. They are the ones trying to add "how" to everything.
Arbitrary explanations are what harmed psychology as a science since people believed in what sounds good, as opposed to what is actually true.
Topic's author
#22
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Intelligence_06
it doesn’t make them “evil”
I consider the people in dark triad area to be evil.
#23
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@Best.Korea
 I consider the people in dark triad area to be evil.
Exactly, that is what you should expand on. Write your own essay if you really will.

#24
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
#25
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
it is impossible to seperate the spirit from the body until the body dies. therefore, evil will always be recognized by the spirit of humanity and label it thus.
our bodys and minds are not made to know and percieve experience and knowledge beyond us. so with our scewed experiences we do the best we can and compare data via science.

dissatisfaction draws more dissatisfaction. pain attracts more pain. when there is no peace, chaos, sin. seeks to grow and become manifest in doubt, fear, and malady
Topic's author
#26
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Melcharaz
dissatisfaction draws more dissatisfaction. pain attracts more pain. when there is no peace, chaos, sin. seeks to grow and become manifest in doubt, fear, and malady
True. People struggle with pain and as a result they are producing more pain through their actions. Pain can blind the person's judgment.