To a surprising extent you can infer a lot about a person directly from appearances and circumstance. I learned this through people watching when I was in school. It can be a fun hobby realizing how much you can conclude, but there’s a dark side to the skill of judging a book by its cover.
It’s a dangerous and addictive path because it’ll feel like the sheer number of times you’re right outweighs the scarce few when you’re wrong, diminishing the significance of those people who you misjudged. The moment you begin taking actions based on those inferences you must realize there’s a difference between statistical likelihood and fact. Being right 99% of the time is a fascinating skill. Being wrong even once and treating a person based on those assumptions makes you an asshole. Rhetorically speaking, ask me how I know.
Yes, I understand the point of this post is in the gullibility, but I wanted to share anyway because I find it fascinating that it seems simultaneously true that you can judge a book by its cover, but at the same time you can’t because those are still assumptions and not completely infallible.
A lot of it is also casting a wide net, and relying on people remembering your accuracy more than your inaccuracy.
“I’m getting the feeling that there was someone you were close with who’s no longer in your life, and that their departure happened in the fall or winter, or around then.”
Everyone has someone die or lose touch, and the given timeframe is nearly the entire year. The person will likely tell you the hit, and then you can build on it by agreeing with the detail they shared.
To a surprising extent you can infer a lot about a person directly from appearances and circumstance. I learned this through people watching when I was in school. It can be a fun hobby realizing how much you can conclude, but there’s a dark side to the skill of judging a book by its cover.
It’s a dangerous and addictive path because it’ll feel like the sheer number of times you’re right outweighs the scarce few when you’re wrong, diminishing the significance of those people who you misjudged. The moment you begin taking actions based on those inferences you must realize there’s a difference between statistical likelihood and fact. Being right 99% of the time is a fascinating skill. Being wrong even once and treating a person based on those assumptions makes you an asshole. Rhetorically speaking, ask me how I know.
Yes, I understand the point of this post is in the gullibility, but I wanted to share anyway because I find it fascinating that it seems simultaneously true that you can judge a book by its cover, but at the same time you can’t because those are still assumptions and not completely infallible.
A lot of it is also casting a wide net, and relying on people remembering your accuracy more than your inaccuracy.
“I’m getting the feeling that there was someone you were close with who’s no longer in your life, and that their departure happened in the fall or winter, or around then.”
Everyone has someone die or lose touch, and the given timeframe is nearly the entire year. The person will likely tell you the hit, and then you can build on it by agreeing with the detail they shared.
Good nuance in that. People are and aren’t simple, we contain multitudes without trying to be obfuscatory. Stay humble in your estimations of others.
I’m sometimes hesitant to speak to people because I can’t remember if they told me the personal thing or I deduced it.