C (14:19)
You know what to do with that big, fat butt. You. You. You. You know what you do with that big fat. But. Big fat. Big fat butt. Okay, I'm looking at my humanity through alien. Why does it. What? What? Why did. Why do any of you listen to this podcast? Okay, let's Google some shit about the Romans and about the Titans and the Olympic gods. Okay, the Olympians, if you will. Actually, we're not going to start there. We're going to start with psychology. In my Frankenstein hoodie. In my Guerbo del Toro Frankenstein hoodie. Thank you. In the spirit of looking at my humanity through an alien lens. And by that I mean, what makes us fundamentally human? My top line answer is our folly. We are so riddled terminally with folly. We are stupid, impractical, selfish, childish creatures. And this I find very interesting when I take myself out of my human body. Okay, well, when I leave this fleshy meat sack, this stinky, warm, wet meat sack, and I look at what constitutes my brain and the things that drive me, the things that motivate me, and I don't mean in a career sense. I mean in life to do anything. What motivates, like, you eat because you're hungry. These basic motivations. I am turning and I am questioning because I want to know. That's the basis of it. I don't. I took a psychology and sociology class in college, and I did it just to get a good grade, okay? And I also took it at a community college, and it got to a point where I was so inquisitive. I was. I'm a teacher's nightmare. I was so inquisitive that the poor instructor at this community college was like, I don't know. Okay? I don't know. They don't pay me enough to know. He said, this psychology 101. Just do the group project and fuck off. And I said, okay, but why do you think that. And what about human nature makes. He said, I don't know. Like, it got to a point one time where I obviously understood the subject matter to the. To a level that was far surpassing just mere definitions or whatever. Like, I'm now turning a critical eye on the text that I'm reading. And I'm like, but why? And can you answer this? And, okay, what about from this perspective or whatever? And the teacher literally goes, do you want to come up here and teach the class in, like, A really sarcastic, mean way. This is a community college, by the way. Do you want to teach the class? And I said, no. And he said, then let me get through the lesson. And I said, sir, I don't think you should be in education. That's what I should have said. I just said, okay, because I don't give a fuck. I'm here to get a good grade and, you know, apply the credit to my degree at A and M, like. But looking back, I'm like, what a dick. What a dick. I made him look critically at the syllabus and the subject matter he was teaching. And he was like, I don't fucking know. And so he made the student feel stupid. That is so fucked up. Anyway, fuck you, Mr. Whatever your name was. And now I'm about to Google it and teach everyone what I wanted my question to be answered as, okay, where you fail to provide an answer, I will now seek it on my own from a peer reviewed journal. Thank you very much. Here's my number one question. Are humans rule followers by nature? Are humans rule followers by nature? And I did a little preemptive googling And I found nature.com. now nature.com is a multi. The world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer reviewed research. It was first published in 1869. Okay, that's. I guess. I'm sure they have other credentials, but I just wanted to give an overview before I read this. All right, strap in. We're looking at humanity through a critical alien lens. Why people follow rules. This was published about 10 months ago. Nine months ago. Why people follow rules, especially laws and social norms, is debated across the human sciences. The importance of intrinsic respect for rules is particularly controversial. To reveal the behavioral principles of rule following, we develop crisp, an interdisciplinary framework that explains rule conformity C as a function of intrinsic respect for rules, extrinsic incentives I, social expectations S and social preferences P. Okay, so let's look at that again. Rule conformity, intrinsic respect for rules, extrinsic incentives, social expectations and social preferences. We deploy CRISP in four series of online experiments with 14,000 English speaking participants. In our baseline experiments, 55 to 70% of participants conform to an arbitrary costly rule. Arbitrary, costly rule. Even though they act anonymously and alone. And violations hurt no one. Okay, this is T. This is like the Stanford prison exhibit. No, not the Stanford Prison experience. What's the other one? The. Oh, come on, don't make me Google it. I know this. It's the experiment they did post World War II to see if Nazis really were, quote, unquote, just following rules or if there was kind of a pre existing, you know, you know you're hurting someone and you continue to do it. What was that experiment? The Milgram experiment, Stanley Milgram's obedience studies conducted in the 1960s. These studies investigated the extent to which ordinary people would follow orders to inflict pain on another other person. The purpose was to understand how ordinary people could commit atrocities such as those in the Holocaust, simply by following orders. Okay, so with that kind of as context where this has been studied for a very, very long time, and I don't know if there's a concrete answer, let's move forward with this crisp study. Oh, this is, this is like the summary. Oh, sorry. God, it's been so long since I've been in school. This is the abstract of the experiment which kind of says what they attempted to research how they did it and then I guess the conclusion. So that's the abstract and then we'll get into the main. So in our baseline experiments, 55 to 70% of participants conform to an arbitrary, costly rule, even though they act anonymously and alone and violations hurt no one. We show that people expect rule conformity and view it as socially appropriate. Rule breaking is contagious, but remains moderate. Pro social motives and extrinsic incentives increase rule conformity, but unconditional rule following and social expectations explain most of it. Social expectations, that's not to be overstated or I guess underestimated. Like shame and bullying and not being included. All of those things are way more powerful motivators than I think we give it credit for. Like, there's nothing worse than being dogpiled on or being, you know, called stupid or being called something that you're not, or having your character misinterpreted maybe because you've misrepresented your own character. Like all these things are. They really go a long way in terms of following the rules or whatever invisible rules there are in your life. Pro social motives and extrinsic extrinsic incentives increase rule conformity. Our results demonstrate that respect for rules and social expectations are basic elements of rule conformity that can explain why people follow laws and social norms even without extrinsic incentives and social preferences. Rules regulate social life and are fundamental for maintaining stable social order and fostering large scale cooperation in society. Rules are principles or maxims that prescribe or proscribe a particular standard of behavior, like do this, don't do that. And they come in various forms as orders, regulations, and Guidelines issued by authorities as laws and legal statutes and as informal social and moral norms, which is stuff like walk on this side of the street. Right? Like, that's what I'm. And it's interesting how. Of course it's interesting, but that's such a throwaway word of how when you. Different countries, different whatever, how much of an outsider you feel when you don't conform to these rules that you didn't know existed. That's a whole other piece of this that I can't even. Like, how do you study that? You know, Like, I'm more than willing to conform to these rules, but shaming me into not. It all just works together. If I'm in Europe or if I'm in Asia and I'm walking on the opposite side of the street, or I'm, you know, walking through the middle of traffic and people are having to part for me, then that's like, I'm going to feel a certain way about that after I do it enough. Or I'm like, okay, I'm going to conform because I don't. It's uncomfortable to be, you know, have your nose turned up at that. Or like to know that you're the cause of a social disruption, I guess. And maybe for baby boomers and Gen Xers, they don't really give a fuck. Now that's another thing to kind of investigate is how it varies between generations. Regional differences, country differences, ethnicity, nationality, generational gender. You know, women, we move out of the way when a man's walking. Stop, don't do that. I saw, you know, like, if someone's coming at you and you're making eye contact with them. Fucking shoulder, shoulder. Check them. Like, it should be a mutual thing to move out of each other's way. Men don't do that. Men are not very accommodating. It's a man's world and we're all just living in it. Like I, It's. It's a personal choice and an intentional decision to not conform. In that sense, despite the omnipresence of rules in everyone's lives, the fundamental reasons why people follow them are not well understood. This lack of understanding is possibly due to a confluence of motives which are debated controversially across the human sciences. Do people follow rules out of obedience to authority or respect for tradition? Or do people have an intrinsic respect for a rule because the rule says Do X and therefore people perceive it as a deontic constraint, that is an unconditional non instrumentalist, required instrumentalist requirement that places an interior demand or a duty on how they should behave? Or do people follow rules out of self interest, fearing that the potential costs of sanctions outweigh the benefits of breaking them? Do people conform to rules to meet social expectations, what they think others will do or demand of them? Or do they follow rules due to pro social motivations considering the impact of their behavior on others? I think that comes down to the person. I mean all of these come down to the person, but that one specifically. Are you considerate enough to think are my actions or me following this rule? Is that to preserve the good faith or good. I guess what am I trying to say? Like am I considerate of other people? And is that how I move through life? And will I follow social rules that align with that? We believe our evidence of substantial unconditional rule following is an important result. The reason is that intrinsic respect for rules is arguably required for social order in many situations in which extrinsic incentives which provide self interest based reasons for rule following are weak or absent and consequences for others are not salient. This argument has been made long before us, but its importance has remained controversial, not least for lack of evidence for an intrinsic respect for rules. With the help of Crisp, our study provides lack of evidence for an intrinsic respect for rules. I get that I don't inherently respect the law because it's the law. I respect it because I guess I agree with it. And then that gets down to the nitty gritty. I don't agree with every law. And then that's why we vote and that's why politics is so important is because we're mandating how we govern ourselves and our kids and our future, you know, and how we've seen law. I, I just, yeah, I'm not, I don't believe that humans would ever just follow a law because it is a law. This argument that humans are subservient by nature or submissive by nature, I don't know if I agree with that. Our results also suggest that sanctions for rule violations and social preferences increase rule conformity. Yeah, of course, if there's a punishment that is to be expected when you don't follow a rule, then people are going to follow our rule. You don't want to be punished, but they're not necessary to induce substantial rule following. Our findings may therefore help explain why important types of rule, social norms, laws and orders, guide so much of human behavior. Because conformity with them is high without any extrinsic incentives. And I think that's just human nature. You know, we don't. Friction is uncomfortable Okay. I mean, I could read this for literally ever. I think that's very, very interesting. You know, something that's tacked onto this, I guess on the flip side of the Milgram experiment is why do humans want power? So much media and so much of what we consume in a day is all about the dynamics of power. Obtaining it, losing it, fighting for it. Like everything is in the pursuit of it. Every great story, every book, every movie, it's about a transfer of power or a vacuum, vacuum of power. All of this is so why, why is it so magnetic? Again, I told you, I'm looking at this from like I was born yesterday. Like I've never interacted with humanity before. And if I was looking at humans and you look at the history of the world and it's like everything ever has been fought over power. That's all it is. Power and money. And what is money but power and freedom? All of the. I mean, it's just so simple, like simplifying it down. So with that being the question, we're now going to go to psychologytoday.com motivation for power why do people want to be in charge? It's a simple question, but like, why? This episode is sponsored by Rocket Money. Are you organizing your finances on your own? Is it stressful? I can imagine. Are you bad with money? Do you have a shopping addiction? Are there things you want to save for but can't find the money? If any of these things apply to you, then you might want to give Rocket Money a try. Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions, monitors your spending, and helps lower your bills so you can grow your savings. They offer an automatic transaction categorization across accounts, plus customizable categories and tags to reveal spending patterns and add context. You could set aside money for a specific trip or something achievable to look forward to. You can set budgets and goals, get personalized insights and regular reports, and receive real time alerts for large transactions, upcoming bills, refunds, and low balances. The app consolidates checking, savings, loans and investments into a single dashboard to give users a clear view of their financial picture. Let Rocket Money help you reach your financial goals faster. Join@RocketMoney.com BroskyReport that's RocketMoney.com Broski Report RocketMoney.com Brosky Report this episode is sponsored by Mint Mobile. Now that the holidays are over, you might be feeling like you've got a big spending hangover. The drinks, the holiday food, the gifts, the travel, it all adds up. Luckily, Mint Mobile is here to help you cut back on overspending on wireless this January with 50% off unlimited premium wireless Mint Mobile's end of year sale is still going on, but only until the end of the month. Cut out big wirelesses, bloated plans, and unnecessary monthly charges with 50% off 3, 6 or 12 months of unlimited. All plans come with high speed data and unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. Use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan and bring your phone number along with all your existing contacts. If I had needed this product about five years ago, this is what I would have used. Trust me. This January, quit overspending on Wireless with 50% off unlimited premium wireless plans start at $15 a month at mintmobile.com Broski that's mintmobile.com Broski Limited time offer upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for 12 months. Plan required $15 a month equivalent taxes and fees Extra initial plan term Only more than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy. Capable device required availability, speed and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com this is by who did this? Jeremy Nicholson, MSW, PhD persuasion, bias and choice are his specialties and it was reviewed by Jessica Schrader. He says, previously I discussed the difference between harmful and helpful types of power. Put simply, hard styles of power can diminish self determination, decreasing motivation and commitment. In contrast, soft styles of power have the opposite effect, increasing self determination, motivation, and commitment. That analysis left open two main questions though. First, why do individuals seek to obtain power? Second, how do those motivations impact their choice of leadership and influence styles? Therefore, I went back to the research for answers. Okay, he cites a study here from 2018 Individuals seek power in leadership positions for two reasons. On one hand, they may be motivated to obtain control over others, especially to influence their behavior. And on the other hand, they might be motivated by personal control instead, particularly to increase their own self determination and autonomy. This difference echoes back to Mary Parker Follett's earlier distinction between power over others, like coercion versus power with others, like co action and management situations. Furthermore, much as Follette noted almost a century before, they also found that each type of motivation led to different leadership behaviors and outcomes. Those who sought power to control others tended to be aggressive and exploitative. Those who wanted more personal control over their own lives, however, were not aggressive or exploitative as leaders. Thus, power only seemed to be corrupting and negative for those who Sought it to control other people in the first place. Yeah, I'm getting that. But here's the eternal question again. I wish I had an expert sitting in the corner that I could be like, come here. Maybe that's something for 2026 that we'll start working on. If I'm like, this is going to be the theme of this episode and I have a resident expert, or we phone them in, I think that'd be really freaking cool, because if I had a PhD psychologist in this room with me, damn, I'd be bombarding them with questions. My question, therefore, is, does power corrupt? Is power the variable or are human beings the variable? And I guess depending on which study or which however you want to frame the research, who knows? But I think that's an interesting point of. If you are, you know, altogether an altruistic person, maybe you only have minimal selfish impulses. You're a person of the people. You're just normal. Okay? If that person is thrust into the limelight, given power, given infinite money, given access, and told over and over that they're deserving of it, you know, they're. You were meant for this. You belong in this position. Does that power corrupt the individual? Who knows, right? I think in some cases, yes. I think if you have a weak constitution, then yes. But who knows? You could be a normal, fine, average, you know, not evil person. And I believe that power corrupts. In this study, I will now be to. I'm gonna do my own research on Broski Nation citizens. I'm gonna round a few you guys up, and I'm gonna make one of you be the leader, and one of you guys either, whatever. And I'm gonna be like, yes, yes, tell me the findings. Did power corrupt you when you created a city state within Broski Nation? Yes. Tell me. Yeah, yeah, same. Yeah, now, now, now. See? Okay. Okay, that's. That's about as deep as I want to get into that. Very interesting. Okay. I mean, I could read about this shit for literally ever, and I've already been talking for 30 minutes about what? Who knows? Okay, let's get into some less serious. That was just some shit, you know, you know, what to do with that big fat butt. I want to look up what is meant by the lion share of something. The. Can I type? The lion share, meaning and origin. Headed over to good old Wikipedia. The lion's share is an idiomatic expression which now refers to the major share of something. The phrase derives from the plot of a number of fables ascribed to Aesop. Aesop's Fables. Wow. Haven't heard that in a long time. And now, who the fuck was Aesop? I love their soap. I love their soap. I'm actually burning one of their candles. This candle is so damn good. And I don't know. I don't know the name of it. Okay, it was given to me. I'll give you the name of the description, I guess. Aesop's Fables or the Aesopica, is a collection of fables credited to Aesop, a slave and storyteller who lived in ancient Greece between 620 and 564 BCE. Of varied and unclear origins, the stories associated with his name have descended to modern times through a number of sources and continue to be reinterpreted in different verbal registers and in popular as well as artistic media. It was an oral tradition. They weren't collected until about three centuries after Aesop's death. How do we know it's real? I guess not real, but how do we know that this is the real story, the true intended meaning? I guess we don't. And isn't that the folly of humanity? How do we know that the Bible's real? We don't. Well, you have to have faith. Okay, what if I don't? Isn't that the point of religion? Yeah, I guess it is. And I guess that's what separates humans from animals, is like, we have a spirituality, we have a faith system. Maybe we yearn to worship something bigger than ourselves. Maybe we recognize how small we are in the grand scheme of things, and we yearn to worship whatever created that grand scheme of things. Who knows? Especially when the fables were written three centuries after Bro died. Okay, who knows? By that time, a variety of other stories, jokes and proverbs were being ascribed to him, although some of that material was from sources earlier than him or came from beyond the Greek cultural sphere. Okay, so keeping that in mind, let's go back to Lion's Shares and Aesop's Fable, and is used here as their generic title. There are two main types of story which exist in several different versions. Other fables exist in the east that describe that feature division of prey in such a way that the divider gains the greater. What?