You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Group Rationality Diary, May 1-15 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: therufs 01 May 2014 02:42AM

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. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 06 May 2014 07:08:22PM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure if you describe Kim's touch game (the Wikipedia entry doesn't mention this only in German). I have played touch Kim with my sons and they can easily recognize most items when 5 years old so I wonder what the limitations of your box were - or what unusual items you chose. Many items can be recognzed by feeling them with the feet only. Remembering many of them is more difficult though.

Comment author: dthunt 07 May 2014 05:36:01PM 0 points [-]

I'm not familiar with Kim's touch game, but I did run across a different game that someone came up with to practice applying Bayes theorem, which involved touching people in the shoulder with one of two objects (in the example, it was a coat-hanger, if memory serves), and then testing their ability to update their predictions based on more information about the object they were touched with. I wish I could find that page again, but I haven't been able to find it again. It might have even been linked off of a LessWrong meetup group.

I'm less concerned with getting people to apply Bayes theorem (which would be GREAT, mind) than I am with getting people to be more comfortable with collecting information, sharing observations, and not getting fixated on personal theories. I'd especially like them to get comfortable with making the jump to making reasoned predictions about hidden properties of objects, given their theories about what an object is, but I'd like to find a way to make that process at least as fun as shaking a box to determine its contents.

The first game was just a deck of cards and a cardboard box large enough to allow the object to be flipped (though one type of flip was not possible in certain orientations). The players were all adults and I consider them to be quite astute; I expect that children could also play, and it could be a useful lesson about how to not get fixated on your own ideas, how to incorporate observations from others, and how to share observations constructively.

The idea came up in a discussion with a friend about how terrible our science classes had been as children, and how learning individual facts was not particularly useful.

Comment author: Nisan 13 May 2014 02:07:00PM 1 point [-]
Comment author: AlexzRoss 06 January 2015 03:16:13AM 0 points [-]

Very helpful and informative!

Thanks, Alex Ross http://www.easyrest.com/