Upper Classes more likely to break the law, lie, and cheat.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

...said psychologist Paul Piff of the University of California, Berkeley...

nuf said

UC Berkeley is one of the best universities in the world. Is your problem with the name 'Paul Piff'?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Upper-class public-sector college professor (in the pseudoscientific field of psychology) envious of those who actually produce things people are willing to pay for, compiles several cherry-picked and ridiculously-pseudoscientific* "studies" that suit his ideological agenda, news media reports on it at 11.

*(Driving a "flashy" car is "indicative" of "high socio-economic status," and 2 hours of grad students making subjective observations at a San Francisco intersection is "indicative" of "moral character" - that sure sounds like the scientific method!)

Science isn't ahistorical anyway. I also don't think your practice of pop psychology on this professor is acceptable even by the, in your (bizarre) opinion, 'lowered' standards of, uh, psychology.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Upper-class public-sector college professor (in the pseudoscientific field of psychology) envious of those who actually produce things people are willing to pay for, compiles several cherry-picked and ridiculously-pseudoscientific* "studies" that suit his ideological agenda, news media reports on it at 11.

*(Driving a "flashy" car is "indicative" of "high socio-economic status," and 2 hours of grad students making subjective observations at a San Francisco intersection is "indicative" of "moral character" - that sure sounds like the scientific method!)

Science isn't ahistorical anyway. I also don't think your practice of pop psychology on this professor is acceptable even by the, in your (bizarre) opinion, 'lowered' standards of, uh, psychology.

I'm glad you caught (sort of?) the sarcasm, but my point is that these "studies" go below even the realm of Dr. Phil-style pop psychology and into that of a segment you might see on Jay Leno.

I'm not quite sure where the 'sarcasm'  per se was, but I saw the irony in what you were doing, yes. This study was pretty clearly a waste of time, as most of its conclusions are either highly questionable or obvious.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thank you for this. I dislike having to defend psychology/anthropology/those kinds of fields to people who insist that everything being 'scientific' to be of value so it's always good to see that there remain people who don't think this way. I would submit, though, that it might be more instructive to use 'non-science' rather than 'pseudoscience' considering that 'pseudoscience' to most people implies derision.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

...said psychologist Paul Piff of the University of California, Berkeley...

nuf said

UC Berkeley is one of the best universities in the world. Is your problem with the name 'Paul Piff'?

haha, I didn't even pick up on that.  just wrote jmf's comment off as right-wing anti-rationalism... a kid from my high school who sold weed used to go by the name 'Paulie Piff'.

'Anti-intellectualism' works better than 'anti-rationalism' in this context because, as wormyguy and I were just discussing, psychology isn't necessarily an entirely 'rationalist' field anyway (though it does have internal logic). That doesn't mean it's not an 'intellectual' field, which it obviously is.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

...said psychologist Paul Piff of the University of California, Berkeley...

nuf said

UC Berkeley is one of the best universities in the world. Is your problem with the name 'Paul Piff'?

haha, I didn't even pick up on that.  just wrote jmf's comment off as right-wing anti-rationalism... a kid from my high school who sold weed used to go by the name 'Paulie Piff'.

'Anti-intellectualism' works better than 'anti-rationalism' in this context because, as wormyguy and I were just discussing, psychology isn't necessarily an entirely 'rationalist' field anyway (though it does have internal logic). That doesn't mean it's not an 'intellectual' field, which it obviously is.

well said.  any thoughts on Paulie Piff?

Freedom Name, but I highly doubt it's the same guy.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

lmao.  I'm just trying to get you to lighten up dude, you're mad serious all of the time.  the thought of the Paulie Piff from high school having ascended to PhD level clinical psych or whatever at the age of 20 is hilarious.

I actually do have a sense of humor, but it doesn't always translate well to text, especially when I'm not talking about myself, since I have a formal writing style and my sense of humor is extremely self-effacing and at times kind of sick.

I assure you, that is hilarious, and 'I highly doubt it's the same guy' was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek.