1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:10,840 Speaker 1: Okay, this thing on, I got a light. Okay, we're 2 00:00:10,880 --> 00:00:17,479 Speaker 1: ready to go. Let's see here bubble bulls eye, here 3 00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:25,760 Speaker 1: we go. Bullshit exclamation now complete nonsense, crazy stuff, no accuracy, 4 00:00:25,840 --> 00:00:30,880 Speaker 1: and just nonsense. Information that makes you angry or annoyed. 5 00:00:31,960 --> 00:00:35,080 Speaker 1: Verb to try to persuade someone or make humor her 6 00:00:35,320 --> 00:00:38,760 Speaker 1: admire you by saying things that are not true. It's 7 00:00:38,840 --> 00:00:42,120 Speaker 1: one someone maybe has like an angle, but it's not 8 00:00:42,240 --> 00:00:45,159 Speaker 1: the full truth, like crap, like nothing makes sense, Like 9 00:00:45,159 --> 00:00:48,400 Speaker 1: they're trying my intelligence. I've got the number one miracle 10 00:00:48,440 --> 00:00:50,600 Speaker 1: in a bottle to burn your fact, and they're not 11 00:00:50,640 --> 00:00:53,280 Speaker 1: really telling you the truth. We have been an international 12 00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:57,280 Speaker 1: oil company for a hundred and twelve years. We want 13 00:00:57,320 --> 00:01:01,000 Speaker 1: to transform ourselves into an integrated energy company. It's like, 14 00:01:01,080 --> 00:01:03,280 Speaker 1: what the fuck are you saying? A lot of what's 15 00:01:03,320 --> 00:01:05,400 Speaker 1: on the media this bullshit. I think a lot of 16 00:01:05,400 --> 00:01:08,000 Speaker 1: the politicians are bullshit. I'll tell you what you want 17 00:01:08,040 --> 00:01:10,720 Speaker 1: to know and don't do anything about it. So many 18 00:01:10,720 --> 00:01:14,720 Speaker 1: people seem to think that bullshit only comes from certain sources, 19 00:01:14,959 --> 00:01:20,880 Speaker 1: you know, advertising, politicians, salesman. Not true. Bullshit is rampant. 20 00:01:21,319 --> 00:01:24,880 Speaker 1: Is bullshitting simply human nature. Everybody's a bullshit oil is 21 00:01:24,959 --> 00:01:27,600 Speaker 1: at one point or another, is there even a difference 22 00:01:27,680 --> 00:01:31,560 Speaker 1: between bullshit and straight up wise? And the thing that 23 00:01:31,640 --> 00:01:33,720 Speaker 1: I think we all need to do right now is 24 00:01:34,319 --> 00:01:37,200 Speaker 1: work to bring people closer together. That we're going to 25 00:01:37,319 --> 00:01:41,280 Speaker 1: change Facebook's whole mission as a company in order to 26 00:01:41,319 --> 00:01:44,920 Speaker 1: focus on this. Parents are fullish it teaches, a fullish 27 00:01:45,000 --> 00:01:48,680 Speaker 1: it clergyman, a fullish it law enforcement people are full 28 00:01:48,720 --> 00:01:59,840 Speaker 1: of shit? Why is bullshit everywhere? Welcome to Calling Bullshit 29 00:02:00,280 --> 00:02:03,960 Speaker 1: the podcast about purpose washing, the gap between what an 30 00:02:04,040 --> 00:02:07,720 Speaker 1: organization says they stand for and what they actually do 31 00:02:08,160 --> 00:02:10,400 Speaker 1: and what they would need to change to practice what 32 00:02:10,480 --> 00:02:13,799 Speaker 1: they preach. I'm your host, Time Montogue, and I've spent 33 00:02:13,880 --> 00:02:17,480 Speaker 1: over a decade helping organizations define what they stand for, 34 00:02:17,760 --> 00:02:20,840 Speaker 1: their purpose and then help them to use that purpose 35 00:02:20,919 --> 00:02:25,880 Speaker 1: to drive transformation throughout their business. Unfortunately, at a lot 36 00:02:25,919 --> 00:02:29,560 Speaker 1: of institutions today, there's still a pretty wide gap between 37 00:02:29,600 --> 00:02:33,920 Speaker 1: word and deed. That gap has a name, bullshit. But, 38 00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:38,760 Speaker 1: and this is important, bullshit is serious, but it's also 39 00:02:38,840 --> 00:02:42,799 Speaker 1: a treatable condition. So when our bullshit detector lights up, 40 00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:47,239 Speaker 1: we're going to explore everything the organization should do to 41 00:02:47,480 --> 00:02:57,600 Speaker 1: fix it. Hey, folks, Welcome to season two of Calling BS. 42 00:02:58,840 --> 00:03:02,800 Speaker 1: In season one, we looked at a number of bullshitting organizations, 43 00:03:03,120 --> 00:03:05,919 Speaker 1: We developed the BS index, and we worked with our 44 00:03:06,000 --> 00:03:08,720 Speaker 1: guests to imagine a bunch of different ways to actually 45 00:03:08,840 --> 00:03:13,160 Speaker 1: fight BS. Here on the show, we define bullshit as 46 00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:16,480 Speaker 1: the gap between word. Indeed, it's in our intro and 47 00:03:16,520 --> 00:03:19,120 Speaker 1: it's what the B S scale is all about. But 48 00:03:19,200 --> 00:03:22,720 Speaker 1: not everybody defines BS in exactly the same way, and 49 00:03:22,800 --> 00:03:26,200 Speaker 1: so we thought, let's kick off season two by dedicating 50 00:03:26,240 --> 00:03:30,160 Speaker 1: an entire episode to the concept of BS itself. What 51 00:03:30,440 --> 00:03:33,000 Speaker 1: is it? Where does it come from? And at what 52 00:03:33,160 --> 00:03:37,200 Speaker 1: point does it become dangerous? How can we all keep 53 00:03:37,200 --> 00:03:48,920 Speaker 1: our BS detectors in fighting shape bull detective? To begin with, 54 00:03:49,280 --> 00:03:52,960 Speaker 1: let's examine the origins of the phrase. The first surprise, 55 00:03:55,160 --> 00:03:59,120 Speaker 1: it doesn't have anything to do with cow boop. The 56 00:03:59,360 --> 00:04:03,520 Speaker 1: bull in bullshit may actually reference the last name of 57 00:04:03,640 --> 00:04:07,400 Speaker 1: Obadiah Bull, an Irish lawyer living in London in the 58 00:04:07,480 --> 00:04:11,880 Speaker 1: late fourteen hundreds who was famous for spouting nonsense. It 59 00:04:12,000 --> 00:04:14,760 Speaker 1: may also have originated back in the days when the 60 00:04:14,840 --> 00:04:18,479 Speaker 1: Pope wrote decrees on parchment and authenticated them with a 61 00:04:18,520 --> 00:04:22,239 Speaker 1: metal seal called a bulla, leading to the shorthand phrase 62 00:04:22,760 --> 00:04:28,279 Speaker 1: papal bull and shit likely comes from shite, the staff 63 00:04:28,440 --> 00:04:34,800 Speaker 1: carried by ancient Scottish warlocks. I'm kidding, Actually, shit likely 64 00:04:34,839 --> 00:04:37,480 Speaker 1: comes from the Old English word shitta for dung, So 65 00:04:37,839 --> 00:04:40,960 Speaker 1: no mystery there. But where there is a bit of 66 00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:45,039 Speaker 1: mystery is when bullshit actually became slang. One thing we 67 00:04:45,120 --> 00:04:47,760 Speaker 1: know for sure is that T. S. Eliot used the 68 00:04:47,839 --> 00:04:50,840 Speaker 1: two words side by side in his poem The Triumph 69 00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:55,680 Speaker 1: of Bullshit, written in the early nineteen hundreds. More recently, 70 00:04:55,720 --> 00:04:58,600 Speaker 1: the concept was picked up by moral philosopher Harry G. 71 00:04:58,960 --> 00:05:03,599 Speaker 1: Frankfurt in his book on Bullshit, which was published in 72 00:05:03,640 --> 00:05:06,920 Speaker 1: two thousand and five. Frankfort writes that one of the 73 00:05:06,960 --> 00:05:10,159 Speaker 1: most salient features of our culture is that there is 74 00:05:10,320 --> 00:05:15,440 Speaker 1: so much bullshit. To see how Frankfort's theory holds up today, 75 00:05:15,839 --> 00:05:19,520 Speaker 1: we sent our producers Hailey Pascualites and Parker Silzer out 76 00:05:19,560 --> 00:05:24,120 Speaker 1: to ask New Yorkers what they think. Would you agree 77 00:05:24,200 --> 00:05:26,840 Speaker 1: or disagree with the following statement. One of the most 78 00:05:26,839 --> 00:05:29,359 Speaker 1: common features of our culture is that there is so 79 00:05:29,480 --> 00:05:35,680 Speaker 1: much bullshit. Oh yes, no, I'm an optimist. I have 80 00:05:35,760 --> 00:05:39,640 Speaker 1: always been struck by how much people really care about 81 00:05:39,720 --> 00:05:42,200 Speaker 1: the truth of the matter. I think a lot of 82 00:05:42,200 --> 00:05:45,799 Speaker 1: the time people are pretty bad at seeing past the bullshit, 83 00:05:45,880 --> 00:05:48,600 Speaker 1: but they really care to the symbolism of bullshit is 84 00:05:48,640 --> 00:05:51,680 Speaker 1: all wool suit. Don't they have the bull there? That's 85 00:05:51,800 --> 00:05:59,240 Speaker 1: my case. They they are tress parents transparent in their bullshit. Um, 86 00:05:59,360 --> 00:06:01,200 Speaker 1: do you agree with the statement one of the most 87 00:06:01,200 --> 00:06:03,480 Speaker 1: common features in our culture is that there's so much 88 00:06:03,480 --> 00:06:07,120 Speaker 1: bullshit nowadays? Yeah? Yeah, I agree with that. The government's 89 00:06:07,120 --> 00:06:09,240 Speaker 1: definitely hiding a lot of things from us so that 90 00:06:09,320 --> 00:06:15,279 Speaker 1: we don't know about politics everyone. Yeah, it's just everywhere. 91 00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:18,560 Speaker 1: It's so common, like everyone every company is somewhat like 92 00:06:18,600 --> 00:06:21,680 Speaker 1: bullshit something the idea of bullshit and bullshit and can 93 00:06:21,720 --> 00:06:25,000 Speaker 1: seem harmless or even funny. But as a listener of 94 00:06:25,000 --> 00:06:27,520 Speaker 1: this show, you know that BS is often used to 95 00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:31,600 Speaker 1: deceive and confuse in ways that can cause real harm. 96 00:06:31,800 --> 00:06:34,520 Speaker 1: So why do people b s and why is it 97 00:06:34,640 --> 00:06:38,320 Speaker 1: so hard to stop it once it starts. To figure 98 00:06:38,320 --> 00:06:42,080 Speaker 1: this out, I decided to call up a real expert. Hello, 99 00:06:42,120 --> 00:06:47,640 Speaker 1: I'm John Petric Shelley, Professor of psychology at Wake Forest University. 100 00:06:48,279 --> 00:06:53,400 Speaker 1: My specific research has really focused on persuasion metic cognitions. 101 00:06:53,440 --> 00:06:57,160 Speaker 1: Were thinking about thoughts that we have and of course 102 00:06:57,480 --> 00:07:04,400 Speaker 1: bullshitting and bullshit detection. John runs the Bullshit Studies Lab. Yeah, 103 00:07:04,520 --> 00:07:08,359 Speaker 1: that's an actual thing where he designs experiments to test 104 00:07:08,400 --> 00:07:12,480 Speaker 1: how we're affected by the social world, just basic judgment 105 00:07:12,520 --> 00:07:16,800 Speaker 1: and decision making. Basically, he tries to understand what influences 106 00:07:16,840 --> 00:07:20,600 Speaker 1: people looking at external information and social environments as well 107 00:07:20,640 --> 00:07:24,040 Speaker 1: as our internal biases. But the reason I first got 108 00:07:24,080 --> 00:07:27,600 Speaker 1: in touch he wrote this book, The Life Changing Science 109 00:07:27,680 --> 00:07:32,559 Speaker 1: of Detecting Bullshit. When I first saw that title, I thought, well, 110 00:07:33,040 --> 00:07:34,600 Speaker 1: why would he write a book when he could just 111 00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:38,080 Speaker 1: do a podcast? But after I read it, I had 112 00:07:38,120 --> 00:07:43,240 Speaker 1: to call him up. I I gotta say, I loved 113 00:07:43,240 --> 00:07:46,440 Speaker 1: your book, not surprisingly maybe given the show, but I 114 00:07:46,520 --> 00:07:50,040 Speaker 1: noticed you draw a distinction between bullshitting and lying, which 115 00:07:50,120 --> 00:07:55,760 Speaker 1: seems like an important distinction. Can you just unpack that difference? Yeah? Absolutely. 116 00:07:55,920 --> 00:08:00,560 Speaker 1: Bullshitting is often confused for lying, but it's very distinct 117 00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:03,880 Speaker 1: from lying in some very important ways. So when someone 118 00:08:04,000 --> 00:08:10,240 Speaker 1: lies to us, the liar is actually concerned about the truth, right, 119 00:08:10,320 --> 00:08:13,760 Speaker 1: and their objective is to get us to believe something 120 00:08:13,800 --> 00:08:18,360 Speaker 1: that they don't believe is true themselves. On the other hand, 121 00:08:18,400 --> 00:08:22,520 Speaker 1: the bullshitter, it doesn't really care at all about the truth. 122 00:08:22,800 --> 00:08:26,000 Speaker 1: They're not paying attention to it at all. In fact, 123 00:08:26,200 --> 00:08:29,080 Speaker 1: they have no idea what the truth is. It's weird 124 00:08:29,120 --> 00:08:31,960 Speaker 1: to me that anybody wouldn't care about something as important 125 00:08:32,000 --> 00:08:35,280 Speaker 1: as the truth. But John says, there are two major 126 00:08:35,360 --> 00:08:38,400 Speaker 1: motives for bullshitting, and one of the motives is to 127 00:08:38,800 --> 00:08:43,320 Speaker 1: be consistent with our actions and what we say. And 128 00:08:43,360 --> 00:08:47,120 Speaker 1: we're also motivated to feel justified by the claims that 129 00:08:47,160 --> 00:08:51,960 Speaker 1: we make and our behaviors. And once you publicly state something, 130 00:08:52,160 --> 00:08:56,360 Speaker 1: you get a lot of social pressure added to those motivations. 131 00:08:57,080 --> 00:09:00,480 Speaker 1: As John explained this, my mind immediately jumped to win. 132 00:09:00,880 --> 00:09:04,319 Speaker 1: After Trump was sworn in on the National Mall, Sean 133 00:09:04,440 --> 00:09:07,520 Speaker 1: Spicer told the world this was the largest audience to 134 00:09:07,559 --> 00:09:12,160 Speaker 1: ever witness an inauguration period. It most assuredly was not, 135 00:09:12,800 --> 00:09:16,800 Speaker 1: but the administration wouldn't cave, and then Senior Counselor Kellyanne 136 00:09:16,800 --> 00:09:21,640 Speaker 1: Conway doubled down bigly on CNN the following day. Why 137 00:09:21,679 --> 00:09:24,400 Speaker 1: did he do that? It undermines the credibility of the 138 00:09:24,600 --> 00:09:28,440 Speaker 1: entire White House Press Office. Don't be so don't be 139 00:09:28,480 --> 00:09:31,600 Speaker 1: so overly dramatic about it. Chuckle, what you're saying it's 140 00:09:31,600 --> 00:09:34,920 Speaker 1: a falsehood, and they're giving Sean Spicer, our press secretary, 141 00:09:35,120 --> 00:09:40,280 Speaker 1: gave alternative facts. They definitely didn't care about the real numbers. 142 00:09:40,520 --> 00:09:43,080 Speaker 1: You sent the press secretary out there to utter us 143 00:09:43,120 --> 00:09:47,319 Speaker 1: falsehood on the smallest pettiest thing. I don't think anybody 144 00:09:47,320 --> 00:09:50,200 Speaker 1: can blame that. Look, I actually don't think that maybe 145 00:09:50,200 --> 00:09:52,320 Speaker 1: this is me as a polster chuck and you know 146 00:09:52,760 --> 00:09:55,360 Speaker 1: data well, I don't think you can prove those numbers 147 00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:58,360 Speaker 1: one where the others. There's no way to really quantify crowds. 148 00:09:58,360 --> 00:10:01,800 Speaker 1: We all know that you can laugh textbook bullshitting. So 149 00:10:01,840 --> 00:10:05,520 Speaker 1: whereas the liar doesn't believe what it is that they 150 00:10:05,559 --> 00:10:09,080 Speaker 1: say is true, the bullshit, it really has no idea 151 00:10:09,400 --> 00:10:13,680 Speaker 1: whether or not it's true. It's very easy today to 152 00:10:13,760 --> 00:10:17,240 Speaker 1: say something that's not very well thought out, that's not 153 00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:22,080 Speaker 1: very well informed, and then to feel as though you 154 00:10:22,200 --> 00:10:24,600 Speaker 1: have to support it, right, because now you're going to 155 00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:30,880 Speaker 1: sound inconsistent and you're gonna sound stupid for for communicating 156 00:10:30,920 --> 00:10:35,360 Speaker 1: something that either we know isn't true or isn't supported 157 00:10:35,360 --> 00:10:39,839 Speaker 1: by the evidence. And it's very seductive once you publicize it. 158 00:10:39,920 --> 00:10:43,080 Speaker 1: So it's it's much better to sort of think collect 159 00:10:43,160 --> 00:10:47,120 Speaker 1: evidence and and and see whether or not well is 160 00:10:47,120 --> 00:10:51,360 Speaker 1: is there evidence for against what what my opinion is 161 00:10:51,960 --> 00:10:54,079 Speaker 1: on the issue. But and so I think those are 162 00:10:54,080 --> 00:10:57,640 Speaker 1: sort of two major motives, especially once people start communicating 163 00:10:58,200 --> 00:11:01,520 Speaker 1: their opinions and their beliefs. But the other key distinction 164 00:11:01,600 --> 00:11:06,920 Speaker 1: here is that society treats liars differently than it treats bullshitters. 165 00:11:07,600 --> 00:11:10,400 Speaker 1: When people lie to us, there's often a lot of 166 00:11:10,520 --> 00:11:14,240 Speaker 1: great negative consequences. You know, we're very unhappy with liars 167 00:11:14,440 --> 00:11:17,640 Speaker 1: when we catch them, yes, exactly. But but when we 168 00:11:17,720 --> 00:11:21,240 Speaker 1: know kind of know someone's bullshitting us, we often assume 169 00:11:21,320 --> 00:11:24,080 Speaker 1: that it's harmless. We pass it off as sort of 170 00:11:24,120 --> 00:11:27,800 Speaker 1: a mild social offense. But this is where we can't 171 00:11:27,880 --> 00:11:32,120 Speaker 1: be more wrong. Virtually all of our problems, whether they 172 00:11:32,160 --> 00:11:39,199 Speaker 1: be personal, interpersonal, professional, or societal, they appeared to stem 173 00:11:39,200 --> 00:11:45,040 Speaker 1: from mindless bullshit reasoning and communications. So what I wanted 174 00:11:45,080 --> 00:11:48,400 Speaker 1: to do was to sort of put something um together 175 00:11:48,559 --> 00:11:53,880 Speaker 1: that puts the problem with bullshitting front and center, and 176 00:11:54,120 --> 00:11:58,439 Speaker 1: to call attention to it and to expose how dangerous 177 00:11:58,480 --> 00:12:02,520 Speaker 1: it can actually be. Right, and I totally agree we 178 00:12:02,960 --> 00:12:07,080 Speaker 1: underestimate the seriousness of the impact of bullshit. And you 179 00:12:07,160 --> 00:12:09,800 Speaker 1: list a number of ways that bs can be damaging, 180 00:12:09,840 --> 00:12:12,880 Speaker 1: in some cases life threatening. And you use a scale. 181 00:12:12,960 --> 00:12:16,439 Speaker 1: In the book which I love, John uses the fly index. 182 00:12:16,920 --> 00:12:22,679 Speaker 1: One fly is harmless, two flies is bad, and three 183 00:12:22,679 --> 00:12:28,120 Speaker 1: flies dangerous. So harmless might sound something like, you know, 184 00:12:28,200 --> 00:12:31,160 Speaker 1: I could throw a football over a mountain in two 185 00:12:31,440 --> 00:12:34,480 Speaker 1: you know, and you get that eye rolling. And in fact, 186 00:12:34,559 --> 00:12:38,119 Speaker 1: some examples I think of bullshit actually have some benefits. 187 00:12:38,200 --> 00:12:41,720 Speaker 1: We tell children in the summer at the pool, you know, tye, 188 00:12:42,160 --> 00:12:46,160 Speaker 1: they put a compound in that swimming pool water to 189 00:12:46,280 --> 00:12:50,400 Speaker 1: reveal the presence of urine almost immediately, you know, And 190 00:12:50,679 --> 00:12:54,440 Speaker 1: as every kid knows, that really isn't true. But I 191 00:12:54,480 --> 00:12:57,440 Speaker 1: think that's relatively harmless, and it's, if anything, it's potentially 192 00:12:57,480 --> 00:13:00,360 Speaker 1: useful to the extent that keeps a few is from 193 00:13:00,400 --> 00:13:03,360 Speaker 1: being in the pool. But then I contrast harmless with 194 00:13:03,400 --> 00:13:07,520 Speaker 1: the two fly example of bad bullshit. My favorite example 195 00:13:07,559 --> 00:13:11,000 Speaker 1: of this is did you see her face? Who would 196 00:13:11,120 --> 00:13:14,600 Speaker 1: vote for a face like that? I think that kind 197 00:13:14,600 --> 00:13:19,199 Speaker 1: of bullshit it dehumanizes, objectifies women. It suggests that they 198 00:13:19,200 --> 00:13:22,960 Speaker 1: can't be good leaders unless unless they're attractive. I mean, 199 00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:26,760 Speaker 1: what doesn't make much sense. But the three fly example 200 00:13:26,880 --> 00:13:31,040 Speaker 1: might sound something like this. You know time, I can 201 00:13:31,120 --> 00:13:35,680 Speaker 1: text while driving without any problems, and and you know what, 202 00:13:35,760 --> 00:13:40,199 Speaker 1: everyone does it, and so I don't see the problem. Okay. 203 00:13:40,840 --> 00:13:44,240 Speaker 1: My response that is no, no, no, but no. Not 204 00:13:44,400 --> 00:13:47,360 Speaker 1: only are these things not all true, but they are 205 00:13:47,480 --> 00:13:51,360 Speaker 1: able and likely to cause harm and injury to oneself 206 00:13:51,400 --> 00:13:54,320 Speaker 1: and others to the extent that that you actually believe 207 00:13:54,360 --> 00:13:57,400 Speaker 1: it is true. And so to say something like that 208 00:13:57,440 --> 00:14:03,560 Speaker 1: just completely neglects true your established knowledge and genuine evidence. 209 00:14:03,800 --> 00:14:07,440 Speaker 1: That would be the more dangerous form of bullshit. Why 210 00:14:07,640 --> 00:14:10,640 Speaker 1: are we so vulnerable to b s? Why don't we 211 00:14:10,720 --> 00:14:16,760 Speaker 1: all have better BS detectors? There are two primary reasons 212 00:14:16,760 --> 00:14:21,520 Speaker 1: for why people are not generally good at the discerning 213 00:14:21,840 --> 00:14:26,160 Speaker 1: bullshit from the good stuff. First, most people believe that 214 00:14:26,200 --> 00:14:31,640 Speaker 1: there somehow immune to bullshit, and actually research suggests that 215 00:14:31,680 --> 00:14:36,160 Speaker 1: the most confident people are often the most likely to 216 00:14:36,240 --> 00:14:39,120 Speaker 1: be duped by bullshit. That's why one of the reasons 217 00:14:39,160 --> 00:14:42,920 Speaker 1: I really love this new show on Netflix Bullshit The 218 00:14:42,960 --> 00:14:48,960 Speaker 1: game show with with Howie Mandel. Let's play so that 219 00:14:49,080 --> 00:14:53,160 Speaker 1: the main contestant is supposed to either answer questions correctly 220 00:14:54,000 --> 00:14:57,640 Speaker 1: or to convince one of the three challengers that their 221 00:14:57,720 --> 00:15:01,240 Speaker 1: incorrect answer is actually correct, and if they can either 222 00:15:01,280 --> 00:15:04,520 Speaker 1: answer correctly or convince one of the three challengers that 223 00:15:04,560 --> 00:15:07,040 Speaker 1: they're incorrect answers correct, then they can move on to 224 00:15:07,120 --> 00:15:11,040 Speaker 1: the next stage and ultimately win a million dollars. But 225 00:15:11,120 --> 00:15:13,600 Speaker 1: what's interesting is when they bring on each of the 226 00:15:13,800 --> 00:15:18,400 Speaker 1: three challengers, each one of them talk smack about how 227 00:15:18,480 --> 00:15:22,760 Speaker 1: good they are detecting BS. Right then the show proceeds 228 00:15:22,800 --> 00:15:25,760 Speaker 1: and you can see how miserable most people are at 229 00:15:25,800 --> 00:15:29,200 Speaker 1: actually detecting it. A lot of us have overconfident but 230 00:15:29,440 --> 00:15:33,600 Speaker 1: underperforming BS detectors, and John says there are a few 231 00:15:33,640 --> 00:15:37,720 Speaker 1: reasons for this. I mean, the research in in Cognitive 232 00:15:37,720 --> 00:15:41,600 Speaker 1: Psychology by Janet Metcalf has shown that people do not 233 00:15:41,840 --> 00:15:45,760 Speaker 1: study subjects they feel they've already mastered. They stopped, you know, 234 00:15:45,800 --> 00:15:48,320 Speaker 1: they go onto something else. And and then the second 235 00:15:48,400 --> 00:15:53,160 Speaker 1: reason is that even before we suspect we might be 236 00:15:53,200 --> 00:15:57,119 Speaker 1: exposed to bullshit, we failed to ask the right questions. 237 00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:01,000 Speaker 1: We failed to ask, well, what exactly is the claim? 238 00:16:01,080 --> 00:16:04,360 Speaker 1: And then another question that's that's hardly ever asked is 239 00:16:04,480 --> 00:16:09,359 Speaker 1: how does this person know that this claim is true? 240 00:16:09,920 --> 00:16:11,880 Speaker 1: So if you ask someone how how do you know 241 00:16:13,480 --> 00:16:16,480 Speaker 1: what you're saying is true ty. You know, most people 242 00:16:16,520 --> 00:16:20,880 Speaker 1: will will tend to be surprised because that's not a 243 00:16:20,920 --> 00:16:23,880 Speaker 1: common question to ask, and then they'll take a few 244 00:16:24,200 --> 00:16:27,640 Speaker 1: steps backwards and they'll already start to kind of clean 245 00:16:27,760 --> 00:16:31,040 Speaker 1: up their first answer, you know, let me give you 246 00:16:31,120 --> 00:16:33,280 Speaker 1: some of the qualifiers, and and then when you you 247 00:16:33,400 --> 00:16:37,280 Speaker 1: narrow back down, it's really good to ask how might 248 00:16:37,320 --> 00:16:41,200 Speaker 1: the claim be wrong? People tend to answer the how 249 00:16:42,040 --> 00:16:44,840 Speaker 1: do you know it's true? Only with confirming evidence, So 250 00:16:44,880 --> 00:16:47,640 Speaker 1: you have to directly ask people and nudge them to 251 00:16:47,760 --> 00:16:52,160 Speaker 1: consider the ways in which the claim might be wrong 252 00:16:52,960 --> 00:16:55,760 Speaker 1: and just to draw a line under this for the audience. 253 00:16:56,160 --> 00:17:01,520 Speaker 1: You make the distinction between why questions and how questions 254 00:17:01,680 --> 00:17:05,520 Speaker 1: in the book and your thesis is that why questions 255 00:17:05,560 --> 00:17:09,400 Speaker 1: are a little easier to slip out of than how questions. 256 00:17:09,680 --> 00:17:15,760 Speaker 1: How forces somebody to really bring evidence into the conversation. Yeah, 257 00:17:15,880 --> 00:17:18,639 Speaker 1: usually when you ask why questions, you kind of get 258 00:17:18,680 --> 00:17:23,879 Speaker 1: a value laden, sort of a heady, abstract response. But 259 00:17:23,960 --> 00:17:28,080 Speaker 1: when you focus people on how, it tends to elicit 260 00:17:28,240 --> 00:17:33,199 Speaker 1: a more concrete response where they, maybe even for the 261 00:17:33,320 --> 00:17:36,200 Speaker 1: very first time, take a few steps back and say, Okay, well, 262 00:17:36,240 --> 00:17:40,880 Speaker 1: what what are the actual reasons to have this opinion 263 00:17:40,960 --> 00:17:43,080 Speaker 1: or this belief, and then you can make a better 264 00:17:43,119 --> 00:17:45,479 Speaker 1: decision as to whether or not you're really buying what 265 00:17:45,560 --> 00:17:50,000 Speaker 1: it is that they're selling. Right in the book, you 266 00:17:50,000 --> 00:17:52,439 Speaker 1: you coined a term which I really liked, which is 267 00:17:52,560 --> 00:17:56,600 Speaker 1: bull ability. I assume it's a comparison to gullibility. Yeah, 268 00:17:56,640 --> 00:17:58,160 Speaker 1: this is This is a word that I made up. 269 00:18:00,000 --> 00:18:04,960 Speaker 1: So a gullible person is likely to believe something, you know, 270 00:18:05,119 --> 00:18:09,960 Speaker 1: despite the signs of dishonesty. Somebody who's especially bulletble, we 271 00:18:09,960 --> 00:18:12,200 Speaker 1: would say that, well, they tend to be a relatively 272 00:18:12,280 --> 00:18:17,760 Speaker 1: lazy thinker who doesn't even care about the signs of dishonesty. 273 00:18:17,800 --> 00:18:21,320 Speaker 1: And one of my favorite examples of this has to 274 00:18:21,359 --> 00:18:25,000 Speaker 1: do with a clip that sixty minutes aired in two 275 00:18:25,040 --> 00:18:28,639 Speaker 1: thousand seven of Bernie made Off kind of sitting around 276 00:18:28,680 --> 00:18:33,239 Speaker 1: and recruiting new investors and his hedge fund, and one 277 00:18:33,280 --> 00:18:35,840 Speaker 1: of the things he said was, I'm very close with 278 00:18:35,880 --> 00:18:37,640 Speaker 1: the regulators, so I'm not trying to say that they 279 00:18:37,720 --> 00:18:39,920 Speaker 1: can't you know that what they do is bad. And 280 00:18:40,000 --> 00:18:42,560 Speaker 1: he was talking about the sec You know, in today's 281 00:18:42,680 --> 00:18:48,800 Speaker 1: regulatory environment, it's virtually impossible to to violate rules. When 282 00:18:48,840 --> 00:18:51,520 Speaker 1: this is something that the public really doesn't understand. But 283 00:18:52,160 --> 00:18:55,200 Speaker 1: you it's impossible for you to go into for a 284 00:18:55,280 --> 00:18:59,200 Speaker 1: violation to go in detected, certainly not for a considerable 285 00:18:59,240 --> 00:19:02,520 Speaker 1: periodyt of talk it. It's impossible for a violation to 286 00:19:02,560 --> 00:19:06,639 Speaker 1: go undetected, you know, certainly not for a considerable period 287 00:19:06,680 --> 00:19:11,520 Speaker 1: of time. Right, Well, that clearly wasn't true. I mean, 288 00:19:11,680 --> 00:19:16,520 Speaker 1: made off proved that for eighteen years, made off truly 289 00:19:16,520 --> 00:19:19,960 Speaker 1: as a cautionary tale. Everyone was investing and made off, 290 00:19:20,040 --> 00:19:22,520 Speaker 1: so no one really thought to look at the facts. 291 00:19:22,600 --> 00:19:25,320 Speaker 1: And this is where things get sticky. Even people with 292 00:19:25,400 --> 00:19:29,040 Speaker 1: the most discerning minds want to belong. And when John 293 00:19:29,080 --> 00:19:31,960 Speaker 1: brought up a study done in the nineteen forties, I 294 00:19:32,000 --> 00:19:34,840 Speaker 1: realized that this desire can be even stronger than our 295 00:19:34,880 --> 00:19:39,760 Speaker 1: sense of right and wrong. The experiment was conducted by 296 00:19:39,760 --> 00:19:44,880 Speaker 1: the psychologist Solomon Ash. He brought in one participant for 297 00:19:44,920 --> 00:19:48,720 Speaker 1: a number of trials. This one real participant would be 298 00:19:48,760 --> 00:19:52,760 Speaker 1: joined by a handful of assistants or confederates posing as 299 00:19:52,880 --> 00:19:55,960 Speaker 1: other participants, and they would set it up such that 300 00:19:56,040 --> 00:20:01,120 Speaker 1: the actual participant always thought they were late to experiment, 301 00:20:01,440 --> 00:20:05,280 Speaker 1: and there was one seat open, and each trial in 302 00:20:05,320 --> 00:20:09,760 Speaker 1: the experiment just consisted of a very obvious answer to 303 00:20:09,800 --> 00:20:12,760 Speaker 1: a question. They were shown a line of a certain 304 00:20:12,840 --> 00:20:16,040 Speaker 1: length and then presented with three other lines labeled A, 305 00:20:16,440 --> 00:20:20,320 Speaker 1: B or C. And one of these lines was exactly 306 00:20:20,359 --> 00:20:25,000 Speaker 1: the same length as the original line. The other two 307 00:20:25,119 --> 00:20:29,159 Speaker 1: mismatches were completely wrong, very obvious. And what would happen 308 00:20:29,440 --> 00:20:33,639 Speaker 1: is the first four or five confederates working with the 309 00:20:33,680 --> 00:20:39,560 Speaker 1: experimenter would start to respond incorrectly intentionally to these trials, 310 00:20:40,080 --> 00:20:43,640 Speaker 1: and the actual participant would look dumbfounded and be like, 311 00:20:43,840 --> 00:20:49,000 Speaker 1: what in the world's checking their glasses and kind of squinting, 312 00:20:49,000 --> 00:20:52,560 Speaker 1: and and they knew that the response that was verbally 313 00:20:52,680 --> 00:20:56,240 Speaker 1: given by the other confederates was wrong. But what Nash 314 00:20:56,359 --> 00:21:00,719 Speaker 1: found was that people tend to feel pressure to go 315 00:21:00,800 --> 00:21:04,320 Speaker 1: along with the group. In other words, even when the 316 00:21:04,359 --> 00:21:07,919 Speaker 1: real participant clearly saw the wrong answer being given by 317 00:21:07,960 --> 00:21:11,960 Speaker 1: everyone else, they still went along with it. They did 318 00:21:12,000 --> 00:21:13,920 Speaker 1: not go along with the group when they had a 319 00:21:14,000 --> 00:21:17,639 Speaker 1: chance to respond privately, but when they had to respond publicly, 320 00:21:18,000 --> 00:21:20,840 Speaker 1: they tended to go along. They tended to conform to 321 00:21:20,960 --> 00:21:25,000 Speaker 1: the group. So what is that about, Well, especially when 322 00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:29,520 Speaker 1: situations are ambiguous, you can even magnify this difference. When 323 00:21:29,520 --> 00:21:34,080 Speaker 1: it's not clear what the the The answer is people 324 00:21:34,200 --> 00:21:37,520 Speaker 1: conform to the group. Even more so, we tend to 325 00:21:37,520 --> 00:21:40,040 Speaker 1: think that the group knows something that we don't. But 326 00:21:40,160 --> 00:21:42,880 Speaker 1: what's wilder to me is that even when the other 327 00:21:42,920 --> 00:21:45,880 Speaker 1: people in the group are complete strangers to us, our 328 00:21:46,040 --> 00:21:50,880 Speaker 1: fear of group projection can cause us to override indisputable facts. 329 00:21:51,320 --> 00:21:54,960 Speaker 1: All of the participants were complete strangers, but they were peers, 330 00:21:55,640 --> 00:21:58,040 Speaker 1: And you know, if you get peers together, even peers 331 00:21:58,040 --> 00:22:01,879 Speaker 1: that you don't know personally, there's that general sense of 332 00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:04,399 Speaker 1: pressure to go along with the group because there's a 333 00:22:04,480 --> 00:22:08,400 Speaker 1: fear of being rejected, a fear of being avoided. It's 334 00:22:08,600 --> 00:22:14,879 Speaker 1: much more impactful than most people would believe. So what 335 00:22:15,000 --> 00:22:19,160 Speaker 1: does this say about the proliferation of BS in our society? 336 00:22:19,359 --> 00:22:22,480 Speaker 1: Even when we see it, it's hard to call it out. 337 00:22:23,880 --> 00:22:27,800 Speaker 1: The Ash experiment is like the snowflake on the tip 338 00:22:27,880 --> 00:22:30,720 Speaker 1: of the iceberg of harm that can be done when 339 00:22:30,720 --> 00:22:34,399 Speaker 1: people go along with bs that they privately disagree with. 340 00:22:35,359 --> 00:22:37,960 Speaker 1: I'm guessing that this is part of why whistleblowers that 341 00:22:38,119 --> 00:22:41,760 Speaker 1: high BS companies are so few and far between. How 342 00:22:41,760 --> 00:22:44,359 Speaker 1: can we expect to fight the rising tide of real 343 00:22:44,440 --> 00:22:47,240 Speaker 1: BS when it's so hard for us to call BS 344 00:22:47,320 --> 00:22:50,159 Speaker 1: on the length of an arbitrary line. How can we 345 00:22:50,200 --> 00:22:53,679 Speaker 1: trust anything or anyone if this is the default setting 346 00:22:53,680 --> 00:22:57,840 Speaker 1: on our internal BS detector. Answers to these questions and 347 00:22:57,920 --> 00:23:15,960 Speaker 1: more right after the break. All right, so now we're 348 00:23:15,960 --> 00:23:19,000 Speaker 1: pushing into just another area of interest for us. There 349 00:23:19,000 --> 00:23:22,760 Speaker 1: have been a lot of many assertions in the media, 350 00:23:22,880 --> 00:23:27,879 Speaker 1: in particular that we're actually experiencing a crisis of trust 351 00:23:27,960 --> 00:23:30,800 Speaker 1: in the world, especially among young people. First of all, 352 00:23:31,640 --> 00:23:34,520 Speaker 1: have you have you seen any of those assertions and 353 00:23:34,560 --> 00:23:37,800 Speaker 1: do you agree, and if so, do you feel like 354 00:23:37,880 --> 00:23:41,440 Speaker 1: BS is one of the culprits I I do think 355 00:23:41,880 --> 00:23:45,639 Speaker 1: are late millennials and Gen zs. They I mean, they 356 00:23:45,680 --> 00:23:49,560 Speaker 1: grew up hearing about concerns with the environment. Even I 357 00:23:49,560 --> 00:23:54,159 Speaker 1: sort of our late generation exerts, you know, we grew up, 358 00:23:54,400 --> 00:23:58,040 Speaker 1: you know, concerned about greenhouse gases and aerosol spray cans 359 00:23:58,080 --> 00:24:00,919 Speaker 1: and things like that. And I think it's developed a 360 00:24:01,000 --> 00:24:06,800 Speaker 1: more socially conscious group than than ever before. And I 361 00:24:06,840 --> 00:24:09,359 Speaker 1: think there's a little bit of evidence that tend to 362 00:24:09,400 --> 00:24:12,760 Speaker 1: have a better memory for bullshit and lies. I mean, 363 00:24:13,160 --> 00:24:16,680 Speaker 1: this sort of the underpinnings I think of cancel culture, 364 00:24:17,200 --> 00:24:19,400 Speaker 1: um I think there are some benefits to it. I mean, 365 00:24:19,640 --> 00:24:23,240 Speaker 1: what we would usually call that in social psychology is accountability. 366 00:24:23,680 --> 00:24:26,520 Speaker 1: When you have to justify, you know, you have to 367 00:24:26,600 --> 00:24:30,880 Speaker 1: justify your beliefs in your opinions. People tend to uh 368 00:24:31,200 --> 00:24:34,680 Speaker 1: feel feel that social pressure and they don't bullshit as much. 369 00:24:34,960 --> 00:24:39,160 Speaker 1: You know, if if someone like Nike President and CEO 370 00:24:39,320 --> 00:24:43,359 Speaker 1: John Donahoe or Phil Knight, you know, again, if they 371 00:24:43,359 --> 00:24:47,040 Speaker 1: say we're gonna address the carbon footprint problem by doing this, 372 00:24:47,160 --> 00:24:52,120 Speaker 1: We're gonna address sweatshop problems by doing that. If they 373 00:24:52,200 --> 00:24:55,080 Speaker 1: don't do it, you know, there's a major base of 374 00:24:55,119 --> 00:24:57,320 Speaker 1: the consumers that are not going to be happy and 375 00:24:57,359 --> 00:25:02,320 Speaker 1: they'll cancel them. It's basic accountability, but I think it's 376 00:25:02,359 --> 00:25:05,639 Speaker 1: one of the major things that is going to combat 377 00:25:05,680 --> 00:25:10,879 Speaker 1: the unwanted effects of bullshit. Yeah, we completely agree. I 378 00:25:10,920 --> 00:25:14,040 Speaker 1: think that's a good segue point to some some questions 379 00:25:14,040 --> 00:25:16,359 Speaker 1: that I have that directly relate to the work that 380 00:25:16,440 --> 00:25:19,879 Speaker 1: we're trying to do on this podcast, because you know, 381 00:25:20,040 --> 00:25:24,840 Speaker 1: our show was was born out of reflections on the 382 00:25:24,880 --> 00:25:27,920 Speaker 1: attack on the US Capitol and the role that bullshit 383 00:25:28,240 --> 00:25:32,080 Speaker 1: as we define it played in its specifically fomented by 384 00:25:32,080 --> 00:25:35,680 Speaker 1: by our friends at Facebook. You know, they claim that 385 00:25:35,720 --> 00:25:38,320 Speaker 1: their purpose as a company is to empower all of 386 00:25:38,359 --> 00:25:40,680 Speaker 1: us to build community and bring the world closer together. 387 00:25:40,800 --> 00:25:44,920 Speaker 1: And meanwhile, what they're really doing is feeding us deceptive 388 00:25:45,080 --> 00:25:49,359 Speaker 1: and polarizing content that clearly in some cases whips us 389 00:25:49,359 --> 00:25:53,159 Speaker 1: into a violent frenzy. And so it's that gap between 390 00:25:53,200 --> 00:25:56,159 Speaker 1: what they say they stand for and the actions that 391 00:25:56,200 --> 00:26:00,440 Speaker 1: they're actually taking that we define as bs on a show. 392 00:26:00,560 --> 00:26:03,919 Speaker 1: So what do you think of our definition, because in 393 00:26:03,960 --> 00:26:06,920 Speaker 1: some ways it seems very much the same. I sense 394 00:26:07,000 --> 00:26:11,199 Speaker 1: a kinship with your work, but is it in some 395 00:26:11,240 --> 00:26:15,000 Speaker 1: ways different? I think what what you are actually hitting 396 00:26:15,080 --> 00:26:19,280 Speaker 1: on is is a special case of bullshit. In most cases, 397 00:26:19,320 --> 00:26:22,640 Speaker 1: I think you're hitting on what we call pseudo profound bullshit. 398 00:26:23,560 --> 00:26:27,879 Speaker 1: Pseudo profound bullshit or flowery, catchy language that can be 399 00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:32,960 Speaker 1: hard to decipher. Is everywhere in the marketing landscape, and 400 00:26:33,080 --> 00:26:37,280 Speaker 1: one a company's purpose is treated as marketing, it can 401 00:26:37,320 --> 00:26:41,639 Speaker 1: fall into this category as well. It's clever language because 402 00:26:41,720 --> 00:26:43,760 Speaker 1: it could it could actually mean all sorts of things 403 00:26:44,280 --> 00:26:46,680 Speaker 1: hard to pin down exactly. It doesn't have to mean 404 00:26:46,720 --> 00:26:49,840 Speaker 1: what you think it means, or maybe it could. Here's 405 00:26:49,840 --> 00:26:52,600 Speaker 1: where it's really clever though, if you ask for clarification, 406 00:26:53,119 --> 00:26:56,880 Speaker 1: and now I can gauge what you think it should mean, 407 00:26:57,400 --> 00:26:59,320 Speaker 1: you know, and I could say, yeah, you know, you 408 00:26:59,440 --> 00:27:02,919 Speaker 1: got it, that's what it means. I recall this. This 409 00:27:03,600 --> 00:27:10,480 Speaker 1: this classic conversation between the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins and 410 00:27:10,720 --> 00:27:16,440 Speaker 1: Deepark Chopra, and Darkens challenged Chopra to explain the mystification 411 00:27:16,640 --> 00:27:21,800 Speaker 1: of quantum mechanics in aging reversal sort of theory. Where 412 00:27:21,800 --> 00:27:24,159 Speaker 1: did the quantum theory come into that? Oh, it's just 413 00:27:24,240 --> 00:27:29,119 Speaker 1: a metaphor. Just like an electron or a photon is 414 00:27:29,160 --> 00:27:33,720 Speaker 1: an indivisible unit of information and energy. Thought is an 415 00:27:33,760 --> 00:27:37,920 Speaker 1: indivisible unit of consciousness. So it's an it's a metaphor 416 00:27:38,000 --> 00:27:40,080 Speaker 1: for very unit and nothing to do with quantum theory 417 00:27:40,080 --> 00:27:42,560 Speaker 1: as in physics. So I think quantum theory has a 418 00:27:42,600 --> 00:27:46,240 Speaker 1: lot of things to say about observer effect. There are 419 00:27:46,400 --> 00:27:50,000 Speaker 1: a school of physicists who believe that quantum leaps, for example, 420 00:27:50,160 --> 00:27:55,639 Speaker 1: are examples of discontinuity and creativity, and consciousness is also 421 00:27:55,680 --> 00:27:59,199 Speaker 1: an example of discontinuity, and that healing may be a 422 00:27:59,280 --> 00:28:04,680 Speaker 1: biological phenomenon that relies on biological creativity. So it sounds 423 00:28:04,720 --> 00:28:08,760 Speaker 1: like a sort of poetic use of the word discontinuity. 424 00:28:09,000 --> 00:28:12,080 Speaker 1: It's it's actually confusion, isn't it to bring in quantum 425 00:28:12,119 --> 00:28:14,560 Speaker 1: theory other than as a metaphor. It designs that you're 426 00:28:14,560 --> 00:28:17,639 Speaker 1: both doing to a metaphor and a little tinge of 427 00:28:17,720 --> 00:28:20,560 Speaker 1: something like what physicists are talking about as well. Dark 428 00:28:20,640 --> 00:28:24,040 Speaker 1: And it's kind of accepted Chopra's retreat. I mean, Choper 429 00:28:24,119 --> 00:28:27,840 Speaker 1: just moved the goalposts. So this is this is the 430 00:28:27,960 --> 00:28:30,400 Speaker 1: problem with this type of language, and you see it 431 00:28:30,640 --> 00:28:34,400 Speaker 1: especially in business, in the corporate world. It's just it's 432 00:28:34,440 --> 00:28:38,080 Speaker 1: just everywhere. Yeah, And that's what we're trying to wade 433 00:28:38,120 --> 00:28:42,120 Speaker 1: into and hopefully clarify for some folks, because we have 434 00:28:42,240 --> 00:28:44,960 Speaker 1: our own our own scale which is slightly different. Rather 435 00:28:45,000 --> 00:28:48,120 Speaker 1: than measuring BS in flies, our scale is a hundred 436 00:28:48,120 --> 00:28:51,080 Speaker 1: point scale, zero being the best zero gap between word 437 00:28:51,120 --> 00:28:54,959 Speaker 1: indeed zero bs and one being the worst total bullshit. 438 00:28:55,200 --> 00:28:58,120 Speaker 1: So we rate all the companies that we feature on 439 00:28:58,120 --> 00:29:00,680 Speaker 1: the show. And as I read your okay, I realized 440 00:29:00,720 --> 00:29:03,840 Speaker 1: that on our scale we might be combining B s 441 00:29:04,000 --> 00:29:07,440 Speaker 1: ing and lying um and lying might live on the 442 00:29:07,520 --> 00:29:10,960 Speaker 1: upper end of all our scale. So what's your take 443 00:29:11,040 --> 00:29:14,160 Speaker 1: on that is knowingly b sing in that way the 444 00:29:14,240 --> 00:29:16,720 Speaker 1: same as lying, or is there a distinction to be 445 00:29:16,800 --> 00:29:19,360 Speaker 1: made there? Yeah? Well, I I think, well, there's nothing 446 00:29:19,360 --> 00:29:23,760 Speaker 1: wrong with your scale. It's perfect for expressing a social 447 00:29:23,800 --> 00:29:28,680 Speaker 1: perceiver's guestimate of lying. I think, because once it's intentional 448 00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:32,000 Speaker 1: and you know something isn't true, then I think you're 449 00:29:32,040 --> 00:29:36,520 Speaker 1: moving into two lying and further away from bullshitting. But yeah, 450 00:29:36,520 --> 00:29:38,560 Speaker 1: I think I think the scale of sort of like, well, 451 00:29:38,600 --> 00:29:41,040 Speaker 1: what you know based on what they say and what 452 00:29:41,080 --> 00:29:43,760 Speaker 1: they actually do. I think it's very useful scale You've got. 453 00:29:44,320 --> 00:29:47,320 Speaker 1: Thank you. I appreciate that. So do you have a daughter, 454 00:29:47,560 --> 00:29:50,360 Speaker 1: what what advice do you give her? Or would you 455 00:29:50,360 --> 00:29:53,320 Speaker 1: give any young people today who faced this you know 456 00:29:53,360 --> 00:29:56,000 Speaker 1: what feels like a rising tide of b s in 457 00:29:56,000 --> 00:30:00,000 Speaker 1: the world. How should they think about fighting this fight? Yeah? Well, 458 00:30:00,400 --> 00:30:01,960 Speaker 1: you much of my daughter. I mean, she's one of 459 00:30:01,960 --> 00:30:05,640 Speaker 1: my best bullshit detectors. I'm not permitted to bullshit at all. 460 00:30:05,760 --> 00:30:09,440 Speaker 1: I remember when she was four, for whatever reason, I 461 00:30:09,520 --> 00:30:11,680 Speaker 1: told her, you know, when I played high school football, 462 00:30:12,080 --> 00:30:15,440 Speaker 1: we won all of our games, and at age four, 463 00:30:15,680 --> 00:30:20,240 Speaker 1: she's yeah, no, come on, now, you did not win 464 00:30:20,360 --> 00:30:24,280 Speaker 1: all of your games. You know. But what I would 465 00:30:24,280 --> 00:30:28,040 Speaker 1: advise her and anyone to do now is just to 466 00:30:28,080 --> 00:30:31,440 Speaker 1: sort of take a step back. When you hear something, 467 00:30:32,080 --> 00:30:35,520 Speaker 1: you read something, you see something that may or may 468 00:30:35,520 --> 00:30:39,440 Speaker 1: not be true, think about the consequences that it has 469 00:30:39,560 --> 00:30:42,680 Speaker 1: if you actually believe it. What consequence would it have 470 00:30:42,840 --> 00:30:46,200 Speaker 1: for your behavior? How might it change your decisions? How 471 00:30:46,280 --> 00:30:48,960 Speaker 1: might it change your beliefs in your opinions? And then 472 00:30:49,040 --> 00:30:52,040 Speaker 1: to simply start asking questions. You could kind of flip 473 00:30:52,120 --> 00:30:54,480 Speaker 1: some of those questions onto the self and say, well, 474 00:30:54,760 --> 00:30:57,840 Speaker 1: who is telling me this, you know, how do they 475 00:30:57,880 --> 00:31:00,360 Speaker 1: know it, how could they possibly know it? And what 476 00:31:00,400 --> 00:31:02,520 Speaker 1: are they trying to sell me? What agenda do they have? 477 00:31:02,600 --> 00:31:06,280 Speaker 1: These are like just basic critical thinking skills. But but 478 00:31:06,320 --> 00:31:08,400 Speaker 1: I would say, just stick with the claim, you know, 479 00:31:08,440 --> 00:31:12,719 Speaker 1: don't attack the person, attack the claim and then suggest, Okay, 480 00:31:12,760 --> 00:31:15,080 Speaker 1: I used to think of it that way too, sort 481 00:31:15,080 --> 00:31:22,320 Speaker 1: of misery loves company kind of approach. Well yeah, yeah, yeah, 482 00:31:22,320 --> 00:31:25,040 Speaker 1: because it's just an easier pill to swallow if it's 483 00:31:25,080 --> 00:31:27,840 Speaker 1: just kind of an error and reasoning than it was like, oh, 484 00:31:27,880 --> 00:31:31,400 Speaker 1: they're just misinformed and they're guilty of bullshitting. But another 485 00:31:31,520 --> 00:31:33,760 Speaker 1: thing I think is good to admit was that we 486 00:31:33,760 --> 00:31:38,600 Speaker 1: we all contribute our own amount of bullshit, and to 487 00:31:39,040 --> 00:31:41,680 Speaker 1: not double down on the bullshit, but just kind of 488 00:31:41,720 --> 00:31:45,719 Speaker 1: admit it when we're guilty of it. Finally, be ready, 489 00:31:46,080 --> 00:31:50,600 Speaker 1: you know, be ready to model a better behavior, you know, 490 00:31:50,720 --> 00:31:55,040 Speaker 1: be willing to provide and offer evidence based reasoning to 491 00:31:55,200 --> 00:31:57,960 Speaker 1: counter and combat bullshit. You know, the hope and the 492 00:31:58,040 --> 00:32:03,720 Speaker 1: dream is to really reduce bullshit and it's unwanted effects. 493 00:32:03,840 --> 00:32:07,160 Speaker 1: But it's gotta have to be a collective effort. Yeah, 494 00:32:07,240 --> 00:32:10,760 Speaker 1: we completely agree. You know, there is a whole generation 495 00:32:10,800 --> 00:32:13,560 Speaker 1: of young people who are taking a very activist stance 496 00:32:13,600 --> 00:32:16,080 Speaker 1: on these things. They're not putting up with the bullshit anymore, 497 00:32:16,480 --> 00:32:18,800 Speaker 1: and that's one of the audiences that we most want 498 00:32:18,800 --> 00:32:22,280 Speaker 1: to provide information for on this podcast. I love the 499 00:32:22,400 --> 00:32:26,120 Speaker 1: concept of your podcast. I think it shines a lot 500 00:32:26,160 --> 00:32:29,720 Speaker 1: of sunlight on problems, and I believe that what we 501 00:32:29,760 --> 00:32:33,840 Speaker 1: need to advocate is treating bullshit like lies. If we 502 00:32:33,920 --> 00:32:36,320 Speaker 1: treat bullshit, even though I say, Okay, well it's bullshit, 503 00:32:36,480 --> 00:32:39,400 Speaker 1: don't assume that it doesn't have a negative effect. Don't 504 00:32:39,960 --> 00:32:43,520 Speaker 1: that it's harmless. John, this was a fantastic conversation. I 505 00:32:43,560 --> 00:32:45,440 Speaker 1: want to thank you for coming on the show today, 506 00:32:45,720 --> 00:32:50,720 Speaker 1: al Ti, thanks for having me. So this is the 507 00:32:50,720 --> 00:32:52,560 Speaker 1: part of the show when I would usually rate an 508 00:32:52,640 --> 00:32:55,880 Speaker 1: organization on the B S scale, But instead of giving 509 00:32:55,920 --> 00:32:57,840 Speaker 1: a score today, I want to talk a little bit 510 00:32:57,840 --> 00:33:01,560 Speaker 1: more about how the BS scale actually the works. We 511 00:33:01,680 --> 00:33:05,080 Speaker 1: define bullshit as the gap between word indeed, and we 512 00:33:05,160 --> 00:33:08,400 Speaker 1: measure that gap by looking at the evidence, talking with 513 00:33:08,480 --> 00:33:11,480 Speaker 1: experts who can help us understand the actions that companies 514 00:33:11,520 --> 00:33:16,640 Speaker 1: are taking to live or not their purpose. Once we've 515 00:33:16,680 --> 00:33:19,600 Speaker 1: asked as many questions as we can, we construct the 516 00:33:19,640 --> 00:33:26,400 Speaker 1: final score using these three guide posts. One action. Does 517 00:33:26,440 --> 00:33:30,880 Speaker 1: an organization's purpose exist to solve a real problem? Are 518 00:33:30,920 --> 00:33:33,800 Speaker 1: they taking concrete action to make it real in the 519 00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:38,120 Speaker 1: world or is it just flowery pseudo profound business speak. 520 00:33:39,120 --> 00:33:42,560 Speaker 1: Are they ignoring glaring gaps between word indeed or taking 521 00:33:42,640 --> 00:33:46,880 Speaker 1: steps to remediate them. Are they considering all of their stakeholders. 522 00:33:48,360 --> 00:33:51,640 Speaker 1: Looking at actions helps us to gauge intention. If we 523 00:33:51,720 --> 00:33:54,440 Speaker 1: find that an organization is willing to correct course or 524 00:33:54,480 --> 00:33:58,680 Speaker 1: engage with criticism, we can see their real intentions shining through. 525 00:34:00,040 --> 00:34:04,960 Speaker 1: To transparency, we always look to see how much information 526 00:34:04,960 --> 00:34:08,640 Speaker 1: a company discloses. Do they publish their goals as well 527 00:34:08,680 --> 00:34:11,719 Speaker 1: as track progress toward them. Are they as quick to 528 00:34:11,760 --> 00:34:14,080 Speaker 1: call out their own shortcomings as they are to claim 529 00:34:14,120 --> 00:34:18,319 Speaker 1: their victories. When an organization is truly purpose led, they 530 00:34:18,360 --> 00:34:27,120 Speaker 1: hold themselves accountable by showing their work. And three, harm 531 00:34:27,160 --> 00:34:30,400 Speaker 1: a gap between word indeed that threatens democracy or the 532 00:34:30,440 --> 00:34:34,040 Speaker 1: future of the entire planet will always be high BS. 533 00:34:34,719 --> 00:34:36,960 Speaker 1: In this way, we're super aligned with John and his 534 00:34:37,000 --> 00:34:41,560 Speaker 1: fly index. More harm always means a higher BS score. 535 00:34:47,400 --> 00:34:50,280 Speaker 1: And if you're a future or current purpose led business 536 00:34:50,360 --> 00:34:53,839 Speaker 1: leader or a conscious consumer, here are three takeaways from 537 00:34:53,920 --> 00:34:58,480 Speaker 1: John that will keep your BS detector in great shape. 538 00:35:01,880 --> 00:35:07,799 Speaker 1: Detective One, ask how, and not why. Why questions are 539 00:35:07,840 --> 00:35:12,479 Speaker 1: easier to answer vaguely, but how questions cut right through 540 00:35:12,520 --> 00:35:15,680 Speaker 1: the b S. How is this company making its purpose real? 541 00:35:16,120 --> 00:35:21,600 Speaker 1: How is it seeing to its stakeholder needs? Two? Don't 542 00:35:21,600 --> 00:35:26,200 Speaker 1: attack the bullshitter, attack the claim challenging b S shouldn't 543 00:35:26,200 --> 00:35:29,640 Speaker 1: feel personal. If your attack feels personal, it's more likely 544 00:35:29,680 --> 00:35:33,960 Speaker 1: to be ignored. B S is a treatable condition, but 545 00:35:34,080 --> 00:35:36,440 Speaker 1: only if the b s R wants to treat it, 546 00:35:36,800 --> 00:35:39,760 Speaker 1: So bring them in on it, Engage them as an ally. 547 00:35:42,000 --> 00:35:46,360 Speaker 1: And three, don't get swept up in group think. We 548 00:35:46,440 --> 00:35:49,239 Speaker 1: are social creatures, and John showed us that there is 549 00:35:49,280 --> 00:35:52,200 Speaker 1: a powerful urge within all of us to just get 550 00:35:52,239 --> 00:35:56,520 Speaker 1: along and go along, keep your personal BS detector sharp, 551 00:35:56,680 --> 00:35:59,400 Speaker 1: and don't assume that if it's going off, there's something 552 00:35:59,440 --> 00:36:03,160 Speaker 1: wrong with you. A lot of folks are going along 553 00:36:03,160 --> 00:36:05,520 Speaker 1: with all the BS in their lives just because they 554 00:36:05,560 --> 00:36:08,560 Speaker 1: don't want to go against the group or ruffle any feathers. 555 00:36:09,440 --> 00:36:13,560 Speaker 1: Come on, get out there and ruffle some feathers. And 556 00:36:13,600 --> 00:36:15,840 Speaker 1: if you want in on the fight against b s, 557 00:36:16,280 --> 00:36:19,239 Speaker 1: subscribe to the Calling Bullshit podcast on the I Heart 558 00:36:19,320 --> 00:36:23,400 Speaker 1: Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to people 559 00:36:23,440 --> 00:36:32,120 Speaker 1: speaking to your ears. Thanks to our production team Hannah Beal, 560 00:36:32,440 --> 00:36:38,600 Speaker 1: Amanda Ginsburg, Andy Kim d s Moss Hailey, Pascalites, Parker Silzer, 561 00:36:38,920 --> 00:36:43,960 Speaker 1: Basil Soaper, and me jehan Zulu. Calling Bullshit was created 562 00:36:44,000 --> 00:36:46,959 Speaker 1: by co Collective and it's hosted by Me Time Monto. 563 00:36:47,040 --> 00:36:48,360 Speaker 1: You thanks for listening.