3 thoughts on “The Con-Man Logic”

  1. It’s interesting how con men are glorified in fiction too. There’s a lot of movies out there where con men are the good guys fighting some evil businessman or crime lord. Gullibility is seen as the sign of a mental inferior (such as when Obama triangulated to the center following his primary win, lot of people rationalized that as a regrettable but necessary duping of the hoi polloi).

    And then there’s the saying “Can’t con an honest man.” If you do get conned, you must have been dishonest and/or greedy. It’s something wrong with you, not the con man. Somehow that doesn’t apply when the con man is say, a big banker cashing a bailout check, but I guess there the problem is who got conned.

    1. And then there’s the saying “Can’t con an honest man.” If you do get conned, you must have been dishonest and/or greedy.

      It depends on the type of con. One type is the easy money, too good to be true get rich quick scheme. You could say that the mark’s greed was a factor. Another type is where the con convinces someone to give them money due to a phoney hard luck story. In that case, the mark’s generocity or lack of suspicion (gullibility, perhaps) contributed to the case. Then of course, there’s the type of con that convinces elderly homeowners that they need some unnecessary repair, only to take their money and make a mess. Personally, I hope an especially unpleasant corner of Hell (if it exists) is reserved for people like that, along with whomever changed the user interface on Microsoft Office 2007.

Comments are closed.