Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds Most Would Become Supervillians If Given Powers
It probably comes as no surprise, but researchers have found that most of us would gladly put on a mask and fight do-gooders if given super powers. From the article: "But power also acts like strong cologne that affects both the wearer and those within smelling distance, Galinsky noted. The person gains an enhanced sense of their importance, and other people may regard them with greater respect as well as extend leniency toward their actions. That combination makes for an easy slide into corruption."
Simply to avoid having to wear tights.
One man's villain is another man's hero.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
For the vast majority of people, the most heroic thing they could do if ever presented with Superman-like powers would be to immediately reject them. A real human presented with such powers would likely be a much greater threat to the rest of humanity than a help. Sure, he might start out rescuing cats from trees and people from burning buildings, but how long before he has a mood swing or a temper tantrum? How long before he succumbs to narcissism and the kind of arrogance and paranoia that god-like powers would bring. How long before he comes to resent humanity for not loving him enough, or worshiping him at the level he has come to believe is sufficient?
And all that's not even factoring in the reality that this is a human being with sexual desires, greed, etc. How would this real life Clark Kent react the first time a girl turned him down for a date, or he didn't have money to pay his credit card bill? You can get into some VERY dark territory there.
Again, such a superhero would almost certainly be way more of a threat to humanity than a help. Unless there was an alien invasion or giant meteor strike imminent that he could stop, he would be much more likely to cause us way more harm than good.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
For myself, I would want to be the villain since they tend to be more intelligent. Granted, they time to time do stupid things like killing the hero slowly and explaining all their plans.
It might be fun to say you would be a super villain, but I have a feeling most people aren't sociopaths. To do what it takes to punish people to further your agenda probably isn't in the cards for most people. Sure, you might not be the most stand up guy, given the powers, but you probably wouldn't be blowing up trains and taking school children hostage.
I would destroy ACTA, DRM, IP and all the rest monsters. Anyone with me?
Study? Did they grant super powers to a set of people and observe the results? I skimmed TFA and didn't see anything about a study. Just a bunch of reasoning about what would probably happen.
I don't think a good proportion of us would go that far.
Give me superman-like powers and I'd be trying to drastically change the world, not protect it.
When we give people something of economic value they tend to monetize it. You don't need to become an altruistic weirdo or psychopathic criminal. Its just like talent. Some people have all sorts of talents and find a way to monetize them. Good singers try to get recording contracts, clever people go to college, etc. If you gave me super strength I would be performing feats for money. If I had super-smarts I would be cracking the stock market or starting a revolutionary tech company.
This doesn't happen in comics because its boring to read about guys putting on shows or starting business. Most superhero comics are nothing more than a sci-fi version of cops and robbers.
Have you ever heard about the invisible woman?
Heard about her? I've been dating her for years!
:Give me superman-like powers and I'd be trying to drastically change the world, not protect it.
Ever see the movie "Hancock" with Will Smith? Or for that matter, "The Incredibles". Both show how easy it is to fall out of favor when you have superpowers. Another good example is "Team America World Police", and while they weren't superhuman, they had super powerful weapons, and their attempt to "save" Paris from terrorists pretty much sums it up. The problem isn't about "doing good deads", it is about all the collateral damage you cause while doing those very deeds. And the fact that it is pretty hard to apprehend and detain you for that damage.
That said, hell yes I would love superpowers, and yes, I would want to do nothing but good. The problem is the other damage, and resisting the temptation of all the Lois Lane types throwing their bodies at you. You would have super babies all over the planet.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
.... nah, lets have fun.
Compared with that, why would anyone want to be a good guy?
You can learn a lot about a person if you just take the time to inject them with sodium pentathol
A real human presented with such powers would likely be a much greater threat to the rest of humanity than a help. Sure, he might start out rescuing cats from trees and people from burning buildings, but how long before he has a mood swing or a temper tantrum? How long before he succumbs to narcissism and the kind of arrogance and paranoia that god-like powers would bring. How long before he comes to resent humanity for not loving him enough, or worshiping him at the level he has come to believe is sufficient?
For me, about five minutes.
Maybe, but that's not what those studies say. You seem to assume that someone has a conscious choice to be hero or villain and intentionally choose villain.
Most people seem to have that kind of delusion. For them you're either clearly doing good and you know it, or you're aware that pillaging and burning is wrong but you deliberately chose evil. Their world has some people who basically chose to be villains and know they're villains.
You can even look at fictional organizations like SPECTRE (SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) in otherwise non-parody movies. And it comes easy to swallow that someone would come up with a business plan like, basically, "I know, let's make an organization that's all about placing bombs and extortion, 'cause that market hardly has enough supply to meet the demand." And then a bunch of people would basically go, "yay, I always wanted to be an evil minion! Where do I sign up?"
In reality what these studies show has nothing to do with choosing to wear tights or twirl a moustache and cackle manically. They just show that most people, if given power, or even if role-playing a position of power, find it increasingly easy to rationalize bad behaviour. They're not choosing to be evil, they just rationalize being a complete dick as _good_ or at least excusable.
And not just business decisions. That's the fun part. Sure, you can rationalize evil business decisions via what I call an "argument from capitalism": being evil is good if it makes some investor money. But it extends beyond that.
E.g., in a study people role-playing some executive-level boss with a posh office would find a $100 bill. And most would not just pocket it and forget about it, but actually lie if someone came asking about it. Whereas those role-playing the peons would be less likely to.
Or like in that baker's statistic that folks on the executive level were more likely to take a sandwich without paying for it, than the peons on the cubicle floor.
The illusion that now you're above those pesky peons and their judgments extends not just deciding if to cut costs by dumping radioactive waste in the Mediterranean (actually happened, btw), but even to that kind of stuff. It's not even about fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders or anything, but basically about being a dick. Those in positions of power can rationalize it better and for being more of a dick.
It applies to heroes vs villains only in as much a case can be made that if they suddenly found Plato's ring and could be untraceable whenever they want, most people wouldn't think "yay, now I can do some serious good with this power", but rather "yay, let's steal some money from the bank" or even "yay, now I can take revenge on the boss/ex-gf/whatever".
Granted, as TFA points out, not all people. Some actually go in overdrive with applying higher standards to themselves when given power or an illusion of power. So I guess you'd get some heroes too. Most just start rationalizing more of what they want and now can take and be de facto villains.
But the fun part is that neither would actually consider themselves villains. Someone could be just in the process of leaving with a sack of cash from the bank and just think it's the due that society always owed them, or that they're actually doing a good thing because they might give a tiny portion of that to charity, or really whatever rationalization.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
And in other news, studies confirm that water is, in fact, wet.
More at 11.
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
Hancock went to the middle of cities and stopped car chases.
I think what GP has in mind is more of a Dr Manhattan "War is obsolete, have free energy, I sure hope there's no super-smart guy who can make this into a bomb" kind of change the world.
Consider that the only outcome at the end of both the film and the original graphic novel is indeed "world peace." Either under the guise of mutual self interest in stopping Dr Manhattan / alien race, or an end to world hunger and war brought about by free and abundant energy. Viedt's manipulation of Dr Manhattan, and his underhanded scheme was moot. Hence Dr Manhattan's last line to Viedt in the graphic novel.
In other words, to change the world you need to think big. Hancock failed at that.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Have you ever read a comic book before, let alone a movie? Almost every issue you've raised is addressed in some story or another from Superman rejecting his power (the world is promptly asked to kneel before Zod). The first thing Peter Parker does is act for self gain and he sees that his family is promptly met with demise. In the watchman, Dr. Manhattan quickly becomes indifferent, while Ozymandias quickly decides that the ends justify the means. Honestly, I think we already know all of the possibilities if we look at all of the alternate universes humanity has scribed that contain such people. In the end it really comes down to the personality of the person wielding the power.
It's really not so much different from becoming a public official. Do you vote to ban cable competitors from your district in return for Comcast financing your re-election? Well, you believe that the health care initiative you're trying to pass is for the greater good so you have to be there to get it through. So you take the money, but then they ask you to sign ACTA. But think of the children without health care. Some people will stick to their virtues and others will fall into corruption. If my both the study and my analogy are correct, then yes, the slide into corruption is slippery indeed.
In other words, to change the world you need to think big. Hancock failed at that.
Which made him human, like us. It is easy to say "think big" until you are overburdened with all the people who want cats rescued from trees, and want you to save them from the small stuff. It would seem you would get bogged down with minutia with no time to actually think big. "What good are you as a super hero if you can't even save us from the bank robber that shot two people!" kind of things. I dunno, it is an interesting thought game, but that is about it.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I wouldn't spend my efforts trying to destroy mankind, but I'd probably rob a bank every now and then.
Sweet informative mod.
...to get what you wanted. Anything you wanted would be given to you anyway. You'd be showered with acclaim, access, women, riches, and political power if you were a superhero. If you had the patience of a goldfish, you wouldn't have to go around using your super strength to break into bank vaults. About the only thing I thing you'd have to worry about is those currently in power being intimidated by you and trying to knock you off or extort you to control you.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
You would have super babies all over the planet.
Providing a woman could withstand your shotgun blast to her uterus.
"Lame" - Galaxar
Mark Waid did a better study of this in "Irredeemable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irredeemable
I'd become evil in an eye blink. Deep within my lair I would tie people to by horrendously over engineered table and unfold my nefarious plots to educate people about how bad their sense of editing, spelling, grammar and story selection are.
"No Mr Samzenpus, I expect you to learn"
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Here's my thing. How much of myself am I supposed to give if I am
1. the only super hero ever.
2. a member of a small super hero population
3. a member of a large super hero population.
What I mean is, even if you are a super hero, are we to allways give 100% and not take care of ourselves?
I want to do what I can to help mankind, but I just don't know how I can spend more than a few hrs a day doing it (with occasional long days for meteors & allien invasion), especially when I still have to work a regular job to pay my bills.
I'm not taking endorsements, I don't think it's ethical. I'd like to have other hobbies and a vacation on occasion.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
In reality "morality" breaks down to "What would provide a positive outcome to society."
If one truely believes, especially when they have scientific evidence to back them up, that a decisions like mandating insurance would have a positive effect, they aren't being "evil", they are just making a decision that some may not like.
Could the scientific evidence be wrong? Sure, but even still, doctors thousands of years ago, drilling holes in your head weren't "evil", they were just wrong.
In other words, to change the world you need to think big. Hancock failed at that.
Which made him human, like us. It is easy to say "think big" until you are overburdened with all the people who want cats rescued from trees, and want you to save them from the small stuff. ...
Kind of like being an IT support guy. You start with grand visions of documenting the entire network, getting all software installed properly and up to date and so on. You end up bitter, cynical and overworked from answering too many calls from people who accidentally pressed the Num Lock key, while your bosses have no idea what needs to be done so they assume you have nothing to do.
I own 2. Thanks.
Do you Gentoo!?