That's a big generalization without any argument to back it up.
Given those facts, I didn't see why a further paragraph of background would be valuable: My point would not land with more people regardless of whether or not I wrote that paragraph.
"Either you share my twisted view of the world or you don't. I choose not to believe that others can objectively evaluate evidence, and there's the risk that they may not come to the same conclusion that I did."
> My point would not land with more people regardless of whether or not I wrote that paragraph.
It would, if you could provide me with some data that supports your generalization. If it was true, surely there would be some research backing it up.
A clear example would be cops and cashiers at Walmart. The later can hardly mess with you at all, even if he would be a bad person.
On the other hand security guards at night clubs and cops have about the same opportunity to mess with me, and I can easily say the guards on average are worse people.
Of course that isn't actual data, but the analysis explores the idea that only sociopaths make it to the top in a great deal more depth, if what you're looking for is depth of background and understanding of where this idea comes from, rather than why this specific person who you responded to believes it to be true.
https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...
Unwillingness to accidentally act like an asshole makes it impossible to act swiftly and decisively unless you trust yourself to be infallible in your judgement.
This is not the same as habitually acting like an asshole.
