Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

How Wealth Reduces Compassion -As riches grow, empathy for others seems to decline
By Daisy Grewal

Who is more likely to lie, cheat, and steal—the poor person or the rich one? It’s temping to think that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to act fairly. After all, if you already have enough for yourself, it’s easier to think about what others may need. But research suggests the opposite is true: as people climb the social ladder, their compassionate feelings towards other people decline. Fucking Conks

Berkeley psychologists Paul Piff and Dacher Keltner ran several studies looking at whether social class (as measured by wealth, occupational prestige, and education) influences how much we care about the feelings of others. In one study, Piff and his colleagues discreetly observed the behavior of drivers at a busy four-way intersection. They found that luxury car drivers were more likely to cut off other motorists instead of waiting for their turn at the intersection. This was true for both men and women upper-class drivers, regardless of the time of day or the amount of traffic at the intersection. In a different study they found that luxury car drivers were also more likely to speed past a pedestrian trying to use a crosswalk, even after making eye contact with the pedestrian. Fucking Conks

In order to figure out whether selfishness leads to wealth (rather than vice versa), Piff and his colleagues ran a study where they manipulated people’s class feelings. The researchers asked participants to spend a few minutes comparing themselves either to people better off or worse off than themselves financially. Afterwards, participants were shown a jar of candy and told that they could take home as much as they wanted. They were also told that the leftover candy would be given to children in a nearby laboratory. Those participants who had spent time thinking about how much better off they were compared to others ended up taking significantly more candy for themselves--leaving less behind for the children. Typical Fucking Conks

A related set of studies published by Keltner and his colleagues last year looked at how social class influences feelings of compassion towards people who are suffering. In one study, they found that less affluent individuals are more likely to report feeling compassion towards others on a regular basis. For example, they are more likely to agree with statements such as, “I often notice people who need help,” and “It’s important to take care of people who are vulnerable.” This was true even after controlling for other factors that we know affect compassionate feelings, such as gender, ethnicity, and spiritual beliefs.

In a second study, participants were asked to watch two videos while having their heart rate monitored. One video showed somebody explaining how to build a patio. The other showed children who were suffering from cancer. After watching the videos, participants indicated how much compassion they felt while watching either video. Social class was measured by asking participants questions about their family’s level of income and education. The results of the study showed that participants on the lower end of the spectrum, with less income and education, were more likely to report feeling compassion while watching the video of the cancer patients. In addition, their heart rates slowed down while watching the cancer video—a response that is associated with paying greater attention to the feelings and motivations of others.

These findings build upon previous research showing how upper class individuals are worse at recognizing the emotions of others and less likely to pay attention to people they are interacting with (e.g. by checking their cell phones or doodling).

But why would wealth and status decrease our feelings of compassion for others? After all, it seems more likely that having few resources would lead to selfishness. Piff and his colleagues suspect that the answer may have something to do with how wealth and abundance give us a sense of freedom and independence from others. The less we have to rely on others, the less we may care about their feelings. This leads us towards being more self-focused. Another reason has to do with our attitudes towards greed. Like Gordon Gekko, upper-class people may be more likely to endorse the idea that “greed is good.” Piff and his colleagues found that wealthier people are more likely to agree with statements that greed is justified, beneficial, and morally defensible. These attitudes ended up predicting participants’ likelihood of engaging in unethical behavior.

GannonFan wrote:This doesn't make sense - there were Donk posters on these boards claiming that most Conks are the poor and stupid people in the South who take more from the government than they give back. I can't believe that wasn't exactly a well thought out position and instead was some broad-brushed partisan jab. What's this board coming to if we're just going to through out unsubstantiated posts?

Berkeley psychologists

Bronco wrote:I got this far into the story

Berkeley psychologists

kalm wrote:But agree, stereotypes are wrong.

89Hen wrote:

kalm wrote:But agree, stereotypes are wrong.

Your photos would suggest otherwise.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:98% of the time..Bronco is so fu*king right..................its wrong.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:98% of the time..Bronco is so fu*king right..................its wrong.

blueballs wrote:Of course we're assholes, it is our role in society.

It starts at an early age, bullying retards or queers as a kid on the playground. Then it works its way through middle school and Jr. high selling cigarettes in the bathroom for $1/apiece to the dumb ass bad kids. It is honed by selling weed in nickels and dimes in HS, and selling coke in college to fund our education and our partying, pussy-getting lifestyle.

When we become adults we take our place in society (aka getting our ticket punched) as upwardly moblie business people, exploiting and pissing on the poor, while navigating the political process to fund our insanely profitable enterprises. With those insane profits we purchase trophy pussy, great houses on water, lavish vacations, designer drugs, and the like.

It is high time we conks embraced our assholedness and wore it as a badge of honor and success, while continuing to exploit those beneath us who we deem unworthy of our regard.

Thanks D for bring this up, I feel much better now.

CID1990 wrote:I have seen a study that shows that conservatives give to charities in overwhelmingly larger numbers than liberals. I'll have to go dig it out.

That said, maybe it is just because us rich conks are looking for the tax break. But that still doesn't explain Al Gore and Joe Biden.


Sent from the center of the universe.

D1B wrote:

CID1990 wrote:I have seen a study that shows that conservatives give to charities in overwhelmingly larger numbers than liberals. I'll have to go dig it out.

That said, maybe it is just because us rich conks are looking for the tax break. But that still doesn't explain Al Gore and Joe Biden.


Sent from the center of the universe.

You missed the point. While that may be true, reread the study in this thread.

Regardless, giving to your church, hunting club, the NRA or political party, like conks do in high numbers, is hardly charity and it certainly doesn't mean a conk aint an asshole.

Regardless, giving to your church, hunting club, the NRA or political party, like conks do in high numbers, is hardly charity.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Regardless, giving to your church, hunting club, the NRA or political party, like conks do in high numbers, is hardly charity.

Giving to a church is charity. When people give to a church, the expectation of charity is there.

Reminds me of the experience I've talked about before when I went riding around with a couple of Mississippi guys after Katrina; both of whom only had slabs where their homes used to be. There were Christians all over the place helping out, feeding people, etc.

One of them said, "Where are all the atheists?"

And the guy who said that was not a particularly religious guy himself. He was just seeing that when his area was in need it was the Christians who were there. They were the boots on the ground helping people. Not the atheists. Not the secularists.