Quite ironically, just one page prior to the note on page 42 I was questioning why the author was always referring to the 'social attacker' as he. Mitnick qualified his point beautifully. Is it that statistically guys are more deceptive or are women better at not getting caught?
I totally agree that humans naturally want to trust and that we must train ourselves to be more skeptical. Trusting wisely is an applicable theory for interpersonal relationships as well. I have been divorced once and through numerous breakups, one of which after a ten year relationship. I am what my friends refer to as a 'serial monogamist.' The purpose of this personal disclosure is to illustrate the human (my) trait of unwise trust. I have so unwisely trusted in other humans that i have lost three couches, a set of Kate Spade plates, one beautiful dog, numerous cd's and books and countless dollars.
Page 53, middle of the page puts it perfectly. 'Yet the more trusting we are, the more likely that the next (insert whatever here) to arrive to town will be able to deceive us into giving up our (insert whatever here).' This is good stuff. I pay over $100 bucks an hour of therapy for this kind of advice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm going to go with "statistically guys are more deceptive." I tried to find some stats to actually support this theory. I didn't actually find anything that said males are more deceptive, but I did find a study that said females are more able to detect deception. "Results show that there was a statistically significant difference in deception detection for gender. Females were better at detection than males." Ha, I wonder what Mitnick would say about that. Those poor, easily deceived secretaries (or should it be administrative assistants?) were all women.
Post a Comment