= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
GabrielDuquette comments on Hard philosophy problems to test people's intelligence? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (35)
What in the world is "skill at philosophy"?
You have a higher opinion of people who make socially foolish decisions?
I bestow a higher likelihood of long-term closeness on persons who "avoid just icking away from the subject." Their ability to do so in a manner that suggests awareness of social niceties is a bonus.
I sorta think you can't possibly disagree with this, or you wouldn't be here.
Oh, I apologize. I entirely misread what you were doing, I think.
Um... kind of? I guess it depends on what sort of contrarian opinions you were sharing and what sort of setting you were doing it in.
The latter part assumed you were mainly replying to the second question I asked. I apologize for the bluntness of those questions, also. However, I would like to clarify my first question slightly.
When I see the phrase "skill at philosophy" it makes me think of professional philosophers. You probably are not trying to test for the kinds of skills which are found in professional philosophers, because most of these skills cannot be tested through informal questioning. I now realize that you were trying to test for, I think, the ability to think logically about philosophical topics and openness to unpopular ideas. Sorry for the misinterpretation.