I took two years of psychology, and although I don't often forget concepts, I do often forget terminology and sources like organizations or names of researchers.
I'm looking for a name or theory or term describing the tendency to assume others are at least as honest and ethical as we are.
I remember talking and writing about this at length after 9/11 and why the attack on the WTC was such a shock to the vast majority of us. Flying planes into buildings is just not something most of us would ever even think of much less do, until some nut jobs go and do it.
When I worked with a destructive psychopath, I learned too late and the hard way that I had spent three years justifying and sugarcoating the things this woman did, all because I wanted to stick to my initial judgment about her (that she was sane and honest).
Another example: Scientology harassment tactics succeed in part because critics who are fairly new to cult criticism either don't know the depths cult goons will stoop to, or they don't believe the stories until it happens to them or someone they know.
Unless you are a psychopath yourself, or you're in a special position or field of work (police work, mental health, etc.) where your experience or training enable you to spot certain traits in people that might give you pause, you won't likely notice anything but the most blatant evidence that the person you're looking at is not to be trusted in any way. And even with evidence, we often continue to give people the benefit of the doubt and overlook destructive behavior (see my own example two paras above).
I wanted to read further about the cognitive science and/or psychology of this but I don't even know what keywords to use. Any suggestions?
I'm looking for a name or theory or term describing the tendency to assume others are at least as honest and ethical as we are.
I remember talking and writing about this at length after 9/11 and why the attack on the WTC was such a shock to the vast majority of us. Flying planes into buildings is just not something most of us would ever even think of much less do, until some nut jobs go and do it.
When I worked with a destructive psychopath, I learned too late and the hard way that I had spent three years justifying and sugarcoating the things this woman did, all because I wanted to stick to my initial judgment about her (that she was sane and honest).
Another example: Scientology harassment tactics succeed in part because critics who are fairly new to cult criticism either don't know the depths cult goons will stoop to, or they don't believe the stories until it happens to them or someone they know.
Unless you are a psychopath yourself, or you're in a special position or field of work (police work, mental health, etc.) where your experience or training enable you to spot certain traits in people that might give you pause, you won't likely notice anything but the most blatant evidence that the person you're looking at is not to be trusted in any way. And even with evidence, we often continue to give people the benefit of the doubt and overlook destructive behavior (see my own example two paras above).
I wanted to read further about the cognitive science and/or psychology of this but I don't even know what keywords to use. Any suggestions?
