Neera Makim Dr. David Hauser PSYC 399 8 February 2019 In this paper, I will analyze the article On the Reception and Detection of Pseudo- profound Bullshit. In such, I will be exploring the studies performed and assess the possible implications of their findings on the way humans make decisions and judgements as well as how these mechanisms of judgement and decision-making effects society at large. The paper motivated by Gorden Pennycook explicates pseudo-profound bullshit using multiple studies. In such, they defined it as "something that implies but does not contain adequate meaning or truth" (Pennycook, 2015). In other words, it is the illusion of knowledge that proposes sagacity and insight where none exists. The main focus of the studies was to discern the factors that predispose one to be receptive or sensitive to bullshit. Furthermore, bullshit receptivity depicts the general disposition to accept statements as profound. In contrast, bullshit sensitivity indicates the ability to make a distinction between pseudo-profound bullshit and genuinely profound statements. To measure receptivity bullshit statements were formed using randomly selected vague buzzwords organized using syntactic structure. These meaningless statements were rated using a 5-point profundity scale; Responses of 1 (not profound) indicated participants were unreceptive, responses higher than one displayed a degree of receptiveness to bullshit. Moreover, to test bullshit sensitivity the researchers subtracted each participant's mean profundity rating for the meaningless statements from their mean profundity rating on a set of motivational statements. The results over multiple studies indicated that bullshit receptivity is positively correlated with supernatural belies and negatively correlated with intuitive cognitive style and analytic thinking. The results also indicated that the reverse is true for bullshit sensitivity, the participants who displayed bullshit sensitivity were less likely to believe in the supernatural and displayed greater intuitive cognitive abilities. In the series of studies presented the results suggest that a response
Neera Makim Dr. David Hauser PSYC 399 8 February 2019 bias towards accepting statements as true may be an influential component in pseudo-profound bullshit receptivity (Pennyhook, 2015). This tendency proposes the idea that the ones who are receptive to bullshit judge profound what they fail to comprehend. Moreover, those with an uncritically open mind lack seem to be influenced with psychologically sophisticated appeals to their system one, predisposing them to be misled by fallacies. On the other hand, those who are bullshit sensitive use analytic abilities to peruse the truth. The implications of bullshit receptivity and lack of sensitivity serve to create profound consequences in all domains of life. Receptivity to the statements presented in this study may not be overly concerning. However, it is the lack of regard for authenticity and truthfulness which serves as the cornerstone of bullshit, that reaps serious consequences. Marketing and advertising, news, politics, and social media all utilise the cunning art of bullshit, inundating society with messages that are disconnected from reality. Take crystal healing for example, its promise to cure and treat real illnesses by metaphysically shifting and balancing one's energy is not proven to