After years of debate between sociologists and psychologists, with psychiatrists choosing to remain neutral, researchers and students at Lakeshore Middle School’s Behavioral Sciences & Applied Research Labs will publish their controversial findings in next month’s New England Journal of Medicine. Although researchers only shared excerpts from their forthcoming paper with the press gathered at yesterday’s press conference, they claim to have proven conclusively that Folks are better, in nearly every measurable category, than People.
While yesterday’s announcement may not surprise most folks, the study is noteworthy as being the most scientifically rigorous of its kind in documenting the superiority of Folks with such objective conclusiveness. In the landmark study, which included in-depth interviews with more than 10,000 individuals, Folks rated significantly higher than People in areas of general affability & likability, and Folks were also 327% more likely to be considered ‘folksy’ than ordinary People.
Proponents from each side of the debate profess relief that this issue has been settled. According to DJJFDJ DDKDKDK, President of the Association of People-For-People, “People shouldn’t accept these findings until we’ve had a chance to read their entire research paper and examine their methodology in detail, but if those Folks are right, I’m sure most People will eventually come around to accepting it.” Brent Bentdinker, spokesman for The Fraternity of Folks Foundation (FFF), said, “We always knew, at least instinctively, that folks were somehow better than ordinary people, but now that it’s settled, maybe we can finally get back to arguing whether ‘nature’ or ‘nurture’ plays the bigger role in shaping folks in the first years of their psychological and sociological development.”
Despite yesterday’s announcement, it’s a near-certainty that certain Folks and People will continue to debate these latest results.