Comments by "Christian Baune" (@programaths) on "Fleccas Talks" channel.

77+33 is the hardest question, students often fails on the double carry. Not that they are stupid, just that the brain is lazy and does "7+3=10" thus "77+33=100". A weird thing ^^ So, it's one of the trap students have to be drilled on, because even the best computer (not the machine, but someone who compute, do calculations) can fall for it too. Another difficult one is "Can you simplify one and half third ?"
2
I like how people resort to "multiple intelligences" as an excuse for someone to be dumb in one of them...and totally miss the point that those are linked. Only geniuses are the exceptions (individuals talented in one intelligence and average or subpar in others, those are rare). If you're bad at maths and trivia, chances are that you're quite average at best in interpersonnel, kinetic, musical, natural etc... I know it's not representative, but if you take a test on multiple intelligence, you would see that on a scale of 10, there is about 5 points between your high and low. So, if you get a 10 in mathematics, your lowest will be a 5 (average). Some people will not follow that pattern, because stats ^^ Also note that the further you go from 5, the least common you are. Now, deducing other intelligence from one of them is though, because you can indeed test the one which is the valley of your subject, or the peak. If you hit 5, then you've no information. If you hit 0 or 10, though, it's a much less risky business. And by testing only two of them, you already have quite a high confidence. https://academicjournals.org/journal/ERR/article-full-text/FBA5FF057170
2
@honedrazorblade No, not a degree. It's not because you didn't pursue a degree that you are unfit. Also, if you think that's because I have none, so I am biased, I have one and pursuing another one while working. I am in an association where I met people who had no credentials and would put phd to shame. They are just too busy learning and working 🤣 I even met some who don't want papers because it's meaningless to them and they have everything they wished for.
1
@_Common_Logic_ Still disadvantaging those who don't see the need. As an example, I did my Bachelor in industrial computing, but it wasn't really a requirement for the field. If I was OK with a lower salary and simpler occupation, I could have taken a job just by being competent. Sure, no big responsibilities, but still a job most people can't do as it's mostly based on problem solving skills. So, I would be more apt to vote than an PhD in Gender Studies, yet, I couldn't vote! A better approach would be to assess people like in 3% shows. Not necessarily on intligence though, but on comprehention, ability to work with data...like the SAT or GRE...but those a linked to IQ 🤣 So, unfortunately, IQ is too good for his original purpose ^^ Now, the thing is that people are more receptive to SAT or GRE than classical IQ tests like WAISIIIr. And the score doesn't even have to be very high as the goal is simply to ensure that people are able to acquire and process knowledge correctly. But good luck to implement that ^^ A middle ground would be to have the votes weighted with a cap. As such that very intelligent people do not get too much weight and that really stupid people would have minimal weight. But even that would be hard to swallow. In the end, everyone equal appease everyone and by sheer number we can expect average to bright people to dwarf others.
1
It's really fucked up, because non American can answer those, I mean, those related to America. The other ones are even more obvious 😁
1
@LittleCaveCreature Yes, 1/3 are not really teachable, 1/3 is the one who will benefit the most and the last third are the one who don't really need to be taught. At the same time, a fourth of people is enough to run society. With 2/3, of people who can do real work, you've some solid margin. And don't think that you first third can do manual labor...they can only do it when supervised, so they end up being "small hands" (like helping hand for brick layers). The situation will improve over time as plumber is slowly disappearing from soil, plants and animals we consume. (So, the Inverse Flynn Effect is ending)
1