Gunnar_Zarncke comments on SciAm article about rationality corresponding only weakly with IQ - Less Wrong

5 Post author: DavidPlumpton 27 December 2014 08:56PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (28)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 28 December 2014 07:47:09PM 6 points [-]

Maybe before you read the article you'd like to do the following test (mentioned in the article):

Jack is looking at Anne, but Anne is looking at George. Jack is married, but George is not. Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?

Submitting...

Comment author: ChristianKl 29 December 2014 09:04:36PM 4 points [-]

The poll lacks an option for those people who have already read the article and want to see the results.

Comment author: FeepingCreature 29 December 2014 06:13:43AM 3 points [-]

Haha. The second I read the first sentence of that bit in the article I knew my mistake.

Comment author: Unnamed 30 December 2014 12:36:02AM 2 points [-]

This question was included on the 2012 LW Census/Survey.

You may want to take a guess at the results from that survey (perhaps after reading the SciAm article, but before following my link to the survey results). What percent of LWers who took the 2012 census/survey answered the question correctly? And, what percent answered it correctly among the subset of LWers who said that they had read "Nearly all of the Sequences"?

Answers: gur erfhyg jnf gung sbegl fvk creprag bs yrff jebatref tbg vg pbeerpg, vapyhqvat svsgl rvtug creprag bs gubfr jub'q ernq gur frdhraprf.

Comment author: satt 31 December 2014 12:00:11AM 0 points [-]

Uru, nccneragyl jr'er vzcebivat.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 30 December 2014 01:13:01AM 1 point [-]

The only two things that even slowed me down were, first, "This is supposed to be hard? Where's the catch?", and second, "Are they pointed the wrong way?"

Comment author: HungryHippo 29 December 2014 07:48:25PM 1 point [-]

Damn, I got it wrong.

Semi-spoiler below.

It did not occur to me to "check all cases". Had this been a math problem about the parity of numbers or some such, I would immediately think "well, A can be either even or odd. If A is odd, then ...; and if A is even then ...; QED".

However, my conscious thought process went more like "We can't tell whether Anne is married, since Jack does not have to be married to her if more than three people exist. We don't know who George is looking at, so the answer must be C."

For this problem you can also get the right answer by reasoning wrongly: "Jack must be married to Anne, so the answer is A."

Comment author: bbleeker 29 December 2014 12:04:59PM 0 points [-]

Dammit, I got it wrong. :(

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 29 December 2014 04:32:38PM 0 points [-]

But the fraction is still much better than in the study.

Comment author: bbleeker 30 December 2014 12:33:09PM 0 points [-]

Yes, and I did get some of the other questions in the article right, and I'm 100% sure it's because of reading LW.